Vi 

i 


HARPER'S    ATLAS 
OF    AMERICAN    HISTORY 


HARPER'S   ATLAS 

OF 

AMERICAN    HISTORY 

Selected  from 
"THE  AMERICAN  NATION  SERIES" 

With 
MAP  STUDIES 

x- 

BY 

DIXON  RYAN  FOX,  Ph.D. 

Assistant   Professor   of  History 
Columbia    University 


HARPER    Sf   BROTHERS    PUBLISHERS 
NEW    YORK    AND    LONDON 


DEFERENCE 
I  B1BUOG. 


? 7^ 


THE 


AMERICAN   NATION 

A  History 

From  Original  Sources  by  Associated  Scholars 

Edited  by 
ALBERT  BUSHNELL  HART,  Pn.D.,LL.D. 

Professor  of  History,  Harvard  University 


Vol.  1  EUROPEAN  BACKGROUND  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY. 
By  Edward  Potts  Cheyney,  A.M.,  Professor  European 
History,  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

Vol.  2  BASIS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY.  By  Livingston  Far- 
rand,  LL.D.,  President  University  of  Colorado. 

Vol.  3  SPAIN  IN  AMERICA.  By  the  late  Edward  Gaylord 
Bourne,  Ph.D.,  formerly  Professor  of  History,  Yale 
University. 

Vol.  4  ENGLAND  IN  AMERICA.  By  Lyon  Gardiner  Tyler, 
LL.D.,  President  of  William  and  Mary  College. 

Vol.  5  COLONIAL  SELF-GOVERNMENT.  By  Charles  McLean 
Andrews.  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  American  History,  Yale 
University. 

Vol.  6  PROVINCIAL  AMERICA.  By  Evarts  Boutell  Greene, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History  and  Dean  of  College, 
University  of  Illinois. 

Vol.  7  FRANCE  IN  AMERICA.  By  the  late  Reuben  Gold 
Thwaites,  LL.D.,  formerly  Secretary  of  the  Wisconsin 
State  Historical  Society. 

Vol.  8  PRELIMINARIES  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.  By  George 
Elliot  Howard,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Political  Science, 
University  of  Nebraska. 

Vol.  9  THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION.  By  Claude  Halstead 
Van  Tyne,  Ph.D.,  Head  Professor  of  American  His 
tory,  University  of  Michigan. 

Vol.  10  THE  CONFEDERATION  AND  THE  CONSTITUTION.  By 
Andrew  Cunningham  McLaughlin,  A.M.,  Head  Pro 
fessor  of  History,  University  of  Chicago. 

Vol.  11  THE  FEDERALIST  SYSTEM.  By  John  Spencer  Bassett, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  American  History,  Smith  College. 

Vol.  12  THE  JEFFERSONIAN  SYSTEM.  By  Edward  Channing, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Ancient  and  Modern  History, 
Harvard  University. 

Vol.  13  THE  RISE  OF  AMERICAN  NATIONALITY.  By  Kendric 
Charles  Babcock,  Ph.D.,  Dean  Col.  Arts  and  Sciences, 
University  of  Illinois. 

Vol.  14  RISE  OF  THE  NEW  WEST.  By  Frederick  Jackson 
Turner,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History,  Harvard  Uni 
versity. 


Vol.  lo  JACKSONIAN  DEMOCRACY.  By  William  MacDonald, 
LL.D.,  Professor  of  Government,  I  niversity  of  Cali 
fornia. 

Vol.  1C  SLAVERY  AND  ABOLITION.  By  Albert  Bushnell  Hart, 
LL.D.,  Professor  of  Government,  Harvard  University. 

Vol.  17  WESTWARD  EXTENSION.  By  the  late  George  Pierce 
Garrison,  Ph. I).,  formerly  Professor  of  History,  Uni 
versity  of  Texas. 

Vol.  18  PARTIES  AND  SLAVERY.  By  Theodore  Clarke  Smith, 
1'h. I).,  Professor  of  American  History,  Williams 
College. 

Vol.  19  CAUSES  OF  THE  CIVIL  WAR.  By  Rear-Admiral  French 
Ensor  Chadwick,  I".  S.  N.,  Retired,  former  President 
of  the  Naval  War  College. 

Vol.  20  THE  APPEAL  TO  ARMS.  By  James  Kendall  Hosmer, 
LL.D.,  formerly  Librarian  of  the  Minneapolis  Public 
Library. 

Vol.  21  OUTCOME  OF  THE  CIVIL  WAR.  By  James  Kendall 
Hosmer,  LL.D. 

Vol.  22  RECONSTRUCTION,  POLITICAL  AND  ECONOMIC.  By 
William  Archibald  Dunning,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  His 
tory  and  Political  Philosophy,  Columbia  University. 

Vol.  23  NATIONAL  DEVELOPMENT.  By  Edwin  Erie  Sparks, 
Ph.D.,  President  Pennsylvania  State  College. 

Vol.  24  NATIONAL  PROBLEMS.  By  Davis  R.  Dcwey,  Ph.D., 
Professor  of  Economics,  Massachusetts  Institute  of 
Technology. 

Vol.  25  AMERICA  AS  A  WORLD  POWER.  By  John  H.  Latane, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  American  History,  Johns  Hopkins 
University. 

Vol.  26  NATIONAL  IDEALS  HISTORICALLY  TRACED.  By  Albert 
Bushnell  Hart,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Government, 
Harvard  University. 

Vol.  27  NATIONAL  PROGRESS  —  1907-1917.  By  Frederic 
Austin  Ogg,  Ph. I).,  Professor  of  Political  Science, 
University  of  Wisconsin. 

Vol.  28  INDEX  TO  THE  SERIES.  By  David  Maydole  Mattcson, 
A.M.,  Harvard  College  Library. 


HARPER   fcf  BROTHERS,   PUBLISHERS 


Ax  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


Copyright  1920,  by  Harper  &  Brothers 

Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 

Published  November,  1920 

K-U 


LIST    OF    MAPS 


United  States,  1920 Frontispiece 

Mediaeval  Trade  Routes  Across  Asia 1 

Conquests  of  the  Ottoman  Turks,  1300-1525     .     .       2 
The  Four  Voyages  of  Christopher  Columbus,  1492- 

1503 3 

Schoner's  Globe,  with  Magellan's  Route  and  De 
marcation  Line 4 

Portuguese  Discoveries  on  the  Coast  of  Africa,  1340- 

1498 4 

Development  of  North  America,    1492-1564      .     .       5 
Distribution  of  American  Indians  About  1500  by 

Linguistic  Stocks 6 

Virginia  in  1652 7 

Virginia  and  the  Carolinas,  1689 7 

Extent  of  Settlement,  1652 8 

New  England,  New  York,  and   East  New  Jersey, 

1689 9 

Pennsylvania,    West   New    Jersey,    Delaware,    and 

Maryland,  1689 10 

Territory  of  the  Five  Nations  About  1650    ...     11 

Settlement  of  Georgia,  1732-1763 11 

North  America,  Showing  European  Claims,  Occu 
pations,  and  Settlements,  1689 12 

Progress  of  French  Discovery  in  the  Interior,  1600— 

1762 13 

Eastern  North  America,  1715 14 

The  Far  West,  1686-1754     . 15 

The  Western  Frontier,  1763 15 

British  Possessions  in  North  America,   1765      .     .     16 
Proposed  Western  Colonies,  1763-1775       ....     17 
Seat  of  War  in  the  Eastern  and  Middle  States,  1775-\ 
1780 18 

I.  Lake  Champlain  to  Albany 

II.  Albany  to  New  York 

III.  New  York  to  Delaware  Bay 

Seat  of  War  in  the  Southern  States  1775-1781     .     . 


PAGE 

The  West,  1775-1782 19 

Division  of  the  West  Proposed  by  France,  Sept.  6, 

1782,  as  Located  on  Mitchell's  Map  of  175»    .     .  20 

State  Claims  to  Western  Lands,  1783-1802    ...  21 

Georgia  Claims  and  Spanish  Boundary,  1789-1802  21 

Distribution  of  Votes  in  Ratification  of  the  Consti 
tution,  New  England,  1787-1790 22 

Distribution  of  Votes  in  Ratification  of  the  Consti 
tution,  Middle  and  Southern  States,  1787-1788    .  22 

Distribution  of  Population,  1790 23 

Distribution  of  Population,  1800 23 

Presidential  Election  of  1800     .     .    ,. 23 

Presidential  Election  by  States  of  1801        ....  23 

The  United  States,  1800 24 

Route  of  Lewis  and  Clark  to  Oregon  and  Return, 

1803-1806  .  25 


Route  of  Aaron  Burr,  1806-1807 

West  Florida,   1803-1819 

West  Florida  Under  the  English,  1763-1780 
West  Florida,  1756 


26 
26 
26 
26 


United  States  and  Canada,   1810 27 

Indian  Cessions  in  the  Northwest,  1789-1816     . 
Northern  Campaign,   1812-1814    (with  Inset)     .     . 

Chesapeake  Campaign,  1814 

Treaty  with  Spain,  1819        

House  Vote  on  the  Tariff,  April  18,  1816    .... 
Jackson's  Indian  and  Gulf  Campaigns,  1813-1818     31 

Cessions  of  Indian  Lands,  1816-1830 32 

Distribution  of  Population,  1820 33 

Distribution  of  Population,  1830 33 

Presidential  Election  of  1824,  Electoral  Vote     .     .     33 
Presidential  Election  of  1825,  in  House  of  Repre 
sentatives   33 

Highways   and   Waterways   in   the   United   States, 
1826-1830  34 


807 


LIST  OF  MAPS 


Latin  American  States,  1823 35 

House  Vote  on  Tariff  Bill,  April  16,  1824  ....  35 

House  Vote  on  Tariff  Bill,  April  22,  1828  ....  35 
Western  Indians,  Trading  Posts,  and  Routes  of 

Travel,  1820-1835 30 

United  States,  1821 37 

United  States,  1830 38 

House  Vote  on  Bank  Bill  of  1832 39 

House  Vote  on  Force  Bill  of  1833     .     .     .     .     .     .  39 

Removal  of  Southern  Indians,  1830-1834  ...  39 

Distribution  of  Population,  1830 40 

Distribution  of  Population,  1840 40 

Presidential  Election,  1836 '40 

Presidential  Election,  1840  ........  40 

Texas  Settlements,  1819-1837 41 

Routes  of  the  Underground  Railroad,  1830-1865  41 

Slavery  and  Slave  Trade,  1830-1850 42 

Maine  Boundary  Controversy,  1782-1842  ...  43 

Oregon  Controversy,  1792-1846 43 

Mountain  Passes  and  Overland  Routes,  1841-1850  44 

Presidential  Election,  1844 44 

Presidential  Election,  1848 44 

Mexican  War,  1846-1848  (with  Two  Insets)  .  .  45 

Test  Vote  on  the  Compromise  of  1850  ....  45 

Territorial  Growth 46 

Principal  Routes  of  Trade  and  Migration,  1840-1850  47 

United  States,  September,  1850 48 

Railroad  Lines  in  Actual  Operation,  October,  1860  49 
Texas  Controversy  and  Territorial  Adjustment, 

1836-1850 50 

Central  American  and  Isthmian  Route,  1846-18(>0  50 

Vote  on  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Bill,  1854     ....  51 

Civil  War  in  Kansas,  1854-1856 51 

Party  Situation  Shown  by  Election  of  1855    ...  52 

Presidential  Election   of   1856 52 

Value    of    Manufactures    and    Staple    Agricultural 

Products 53 

Presidential  Election  of  1860 54 

United  States,  1860 55 

Distribution  of  Population,  1860 56 


Seat  of  War  in  the  West,  1861-1865 

Neighborhood  of  Richmond 

Shenandoah  Valley,  1861-1865 

Central  Maryland  and  Pennsylvania,   1861-1865     . 

Seat  of  War  in  the  East,  1861-1865 

Seat  of  War  in  the  South,  1861-1865 

Georgia  Campaign,   1863-1864 

Means  of   Transit,  March  4,  1861 

Progress  of  Emancipation,  1850-1865 

Trunk  Line  Railway  Systems,  1875    ...... 

Congressional  Election  of  1866,  House  of  Represen 
tatives  

Process  of  Reconstruction 

Distribution  of  Population,  1870 

Alaska  Boundary  Controversy,  1867-1903       .     .     . 

Election  of  1876 

Distribution  of  Population,  1880 

Presidential  Election,  1884 

Distribution  of  Population,  1890 

House  Vote  on  McKinley  Tariff  Bill,  1890    .     .     . 

Presidential  Election,  1892 

House  Vote  on  Wilson  Tariff  Bill,  August  13,  1894 

Proposed  Isthmian  Canal  Routes,  1848-1884  (with 
Inset)  

West  Indies  and  Mexico  (with  Insets) 

Philippines  and  Eastern  Coast  of  Asia 

Distribution  of  Races,  1900 

Manufacturing  Areas,    1900 

Presidential  Election,  1912 

House  Vote  on  Underwood  Tariff,  1913     .     .     .     . 

Presidential  Election,  1916 

Conservation  and  Reclamation,  1900-1917     .     .     . 

Development  of  American  Interests  in  the  Pacific, 
1791-1903  

Caribbean  Region,  Showing  Protectorates  of  the 
United  States,  1917 

Military  Expeditions  to  1917 

Regional  Distributions  of  Products  in  the  United 
States  

The  Western  Front  in  the  World  War 

Western  Railroads,  1906 


PAGE 

56 
57 


58 
58 
59 
59 
60 
61 
62 


63 
63 
64 
65 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 

72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 

80 

81 
82 


82 
83 
84 


IN  historical  study,  even  of  an  elementary  sort,  the  map  has  ceased  to  be  regarded 
as  a  luxury.    Yet,  as  every  teacher  knows,  maps  which  adequately  show  the 
progress  of  American  life  have  been  impossible  to  find  in  a  cheap,  convenient 
form.     This  unobtainable  necessity  has,   therefore,  been  so  often   a  subject  of 
complaint  that  it  is  believed  that  this  atlas  will  be  welcomed  with  somewhat  of 
relief.     The  one  hundred  and  twenty-eight  maps  herein  presented  were  prepared 
in  consultation  with  a  number  of  the  leading  scholars  in  the  field  of  American 
history,  and  it  seems  doubtful  if  the  benefits  of  complete  and  special  information 
are  likely  to  be  more  satisfactorily  combined. 

An  atlas  is,  of  course,  primarily  a  work  of  reference.  Yet  an  orderly  ar 
rangement,  as  in  a  museum,  may  suggest  the  development  of  process  or  of  life; 
and  as  a  curator  might  carefully  point  out  the  illustrative  value  of  such  specimens 
and  models,  so  here  the  editor  has  appended  a  short  essay  intended  to  suggest 
some  ways  in  which  the  historical  map  may  be  of  service.  But  he  would  be  a 
sanguine  teacher  who  expected  students  from  these  few  reflections  to  realize  for 
themselves  the  possibilities  of  an  atlas.  Consequently  there  is  joined  with  it  an 
extended  course  in  the  historical  geography  of  the  United  States,  in  which  the 
student,  by  observing  these  directions,  works  out  on  outline  maps,  easily  procured, 
the  record  of  a  development  in  space  as  well  as  in  time,  following  the  national 
history  with  his  hand  as  well  as  his  eye.  The  studies  are  closely  integrated 
with  the  atlas,  by  specific  reference,  so  that  it  will  seldom  be  necessary  to  look 
beyond  its  pages  for  essential  facts.  In  many  cases,  however,  additional  informa 
tion  is  included  in  the  text,  which  the  student  is  asked  to  transfer  into  graphic 
form.  Citations  to  Professor  Bassett's  Short  History  of  the  United  States,  New 
York,  1913,  and,  for  more  elaborate  treatment,,  to  the  American  Nation  Series, 
make  the  studies  available  as  supplementary  to  a  classroom  course,  or  as  a  course 
in  themselves,  to  be  rounded  out  by  lectures  and  library  research.  Naturally  map 
studies  may  be  cut  to  meet  the  individual  requirements,  and,  indeed,  the  book  is 
so  arranged  that  the  atlas  may  be  used  alone  without  reference  to  Part  II. 

There  is  one  class  of  students,  happily  growing  more  numerous  and  important 
—those  who  study  by  themselves  at  home — whose  needs  have  been  constantly 
considered,  and  it  is  sincerely  hoped  that  to  many  a  solitary  inquirer  this  book 
will  bring  a  clearer  understanding  of  the  history  of  the  United  States. 

Dixox  RYAX  Fox. 


3T      -\^^^/^^i 
^^*    .Cfifr?* 


DDD 


with  Magellan's  Ro 
and  Demarcation 

DRAWN    1523 


DEVELOPMENT 

OF 
NORTH  AMERICA 


100"  longitude  West  90"          from  Greenwich  80" 


arniington 

CO  X3f  EC  TIC  IJT 

Trading      ' 
House 


Treaty  ofuartf,:rd   A  Jp~^ft^&f^~ 

*HCKsW5155 


\\     *£,°r.t  CA, .    lgMSL3g?£)f!fa'*  1GSMC51 
^Vv ;°^  «,>M/;  X^P'-^w  Gottenberg 
%\\  R*  ***%££#    -<•'     atoi3fc*J648 


EXTEXT  OF 

SETTLEMENT 

1652 


The  double  dotted  line  .......  -_-^-^^--=-~-= 

is  approximately  the  frontier  of  Settlement 


\  ,       \  //  :\_  ^  _  _/- 

"7          ~T"T'T~         ""^2 


rARRAGANSBTT  (V  ^J  ^  TivertOC 
1'rmidenc)  /.y^/Porlsmout 


r^a.  jr 


„««*,».  _  01 


EXGLAXD, 
YORK 


EAST  XEW  JERSE 
1689 

Frontier  of  Settlement  ....          .......  -— 


WEST  ]^EW  JERSEY 
DELAWARE 


MARYLAND 
1689 


10 


] - 


TERRITORY 

OF   THE 

FIVE  NATIONS 

ABOUT    1650 


i  •  J 


SETTLEMENT  OF  GEO11GIA 
1732-1703 


.'J*  Ft.  William 


---      ..J 


Charter  Boundaries  1732 

Boundaries  by  Proclamation  of  1763 

X  x  x  x  x      Spanish  Claim 
Road 

SCALE    OF    MILES 


St.  Francis\_ 
<?Ft.P}colatiS 


•12 


s  2  ili-s  s 

g^-iu 


H     U  D    \S     0     N 


EASTERN  XORTII  AMERICA 
1715 

|  \English  \  \  Spanish  I  I  Fret; 

Prolab^'rench  Boundary  for  Hudson  Bay  (. 
Cla  im  of  HMson  Bay  Co. 


Limit  of  English  Claims 
—  +  ^_  Limit  of  Spanish  Claims 
Limit  of  French  Claiin* 

The  solid  coloring  indicates  possessions  or  Clai 

not  actively  disputed.  / 

The  stripes  of  different  col/rs  indicate  Rival  Claims 


GULF       OF       MEXICO 


Ho     Longitude       West      80°   from        Greenwich      75 


BRITISH  POSSESSIONS 

IN  NORTH  AMKRICA,   176G 

As  defined  by  the  Treaty  of  1 763, 
iou_o!17G3 

of  1764-1767 

OF  MILES 


13 


17 


THE  AVEST 
1775-1782 


American  Settlements  West  of  the 

mountains  during  the.  American 

Revolution. 

The  Approximate  Boundaries  of 
territory  actually  settled  or  con 
quered  during  Am.  Revolution. 


M     K     X     I      C\     0 


DIYISIOX  OF  THE  WEST 

PROPOSED    BY  FRANCE 

SKPT.   6TH,    1783 

AS  LOCATED  ON 

MITCHKLI/S  MAP  OF  1755 


S»o        Longitude  West         8>'       from  Greenwich 


20 


LINE     OF     ENGLISH     \^EST      FLORIDA 


<j  i , f I VI.  ' '•""•'?" 

CLAIMKU    HV  SIMI.OAMI   iVlTKU    STATKS  1 J3S 


/    «  K  OJJ   tiiJ^A 

I  .  — -^          ^x, 


17  E  It  II  I  T  O  It  T 


GK011GIA  CI.AI3IS  AND 
SPANISH  BOUNDARY 

1789-1802 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


a    Territory  disputed  bij  United  Stal 
anil  Spain.  J/vv  ;;95. 


21 


•    O) 

!z 

H 
O 

0 

*      £ 
o     t 

O 

1 

t—  1 

H 

B   1 
g  s 

* 

M 

0 

O 

S     c 

BUTI 

M 

H 

§  s 

0       r^ 

r^ 

P3 

3     != 

H 

s     r 

CE 

^. 

fe 

^    E 

p 

M 

s 

22 


imjim^1  ,,,-,•,  :p%3V- 

liiM®$£*    #?^  saR*^  =<? 


XSI^,i^  a i<«^? 

1        X/      __;.f  i  U'H  KW-«S\\  -'  -.Jff-   f 


; 


(,'    U    L   F       OF 

951  Loncitude     90"       West      from         85;       Green«ii-h 


[SPtTEttXAllKW  •/ 


PRESIDENTIAL 
ELECTIOX 

OF  180O 


PRESIDENTIAL 
ELECTIOX 
BY  STATES 

OF  1801 


[  \   Federalist 

_J   Republican 
Divided 


F       OF      31  E  X  I  C 

90        Longitude  West        85: from  Greenwich 


GCL  F,       OF       .MEXICO 


|i-V     •  4  Jefferson 

Blank  ballot 


23 


AKDTHE   A       (__,']    & 

VKITKD  STATES          \~/    \    \     ^  ^  ^ 


THE 
UXITED  STATES 


25 


KOUTE  OF 
AARON  BURR 

18O6-1807 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


26 


"\3ul\s.wasxii      \-A  -  =',  5  i     _     /;    ',  -5  -•  ,  .ti<X\'. 

*  ,  t  <-,  V{  gr/  •      ^A-,  -jj  _  •..    -  , :  ^ •,  3    oiSO  - 

Pll 

v. \  •Q..?TJ?.A\V*Mlrfi-r,*'--j      -       ;.<»'•  ;->.!  -^  = 


27 


Ft.t'lark 
1804-1-57     - 


B.    (jrecnrille  treaty  iritli  Delaware  and  other  In 


dians,  Aug.  3,  1795. 

C.  Greenville  and  Ft.  Wayne  treaties,  June  2, 1803 

D.  Vincennes  treaty  with  Kaskaskia  Indians, 
Aug.  13,  1803. 

E.  Vincennes  treaty  with  Delaware  Indians, 
Aug.  18,  1804. 

F.  «.  Louis  treaty  with  Sauk  and  Fox  Indians, 
Xoi'.  3,  1804. 

G.  Furt  Industry  treaty,  July  4,  1805. 

a.   Orouseland  treaty  with  Miami  and  other  In- 

diant,  Aug.  21,  1805. 
/.    Yincennti  treaty  with  Rankishaw  Indians, 

Dec.  30,  1805. 
J.   Detroit  treaty  with  Ottawa  and  other  Indians, 

Nov.  17,  1807. 
K.  Furt  Wayne  treaty  with  Delaware  and  other 

Indians,  Ifept.  30,  1809. 
L.   Vincennet  treaty  with  Kickapoo  Indians, 

9.  1809. 
M.  ft. Louis  treaty  u'ith  Ottawa  and  other  Indiant 

Aug.  24,  181C. 


INDIAN  CESSIONS 

I\T  THE 

NORTHWEST 

1789-181G 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


NORTHERN  CAMPAIGN 
1812-1814 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


CHESAPEAKE 
CAMPAIGN 

1814 


29 


t-  i 


! 
r^~-^^?Fei  niuiiliii 

(  |^ 


Mobile  fei'WE       A 


JACKSON'S 

IX  1)1  AX  AXD 

GULF  CA3IPAIGXS 

1813-1818 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


31 


DISTRIBUTION 

OF 
POPULATION 

1820 

I  I  Vnocc*fi,«  area, 

I      ~~l  '2  to  lit  inhabitemtl 
I I  to  the  m/unri  mile 


DISTRIBUTION 

OF 
POPULATION 

1830 

|  |  Unoccupied  areas 

I        ~~1  2  to  18  inhabitant! 
I 1  to  the  tauan  mila 


(niCHtd         r 

'^>v          OlA-^La 


:^        -'--^- 

-       '^  •    SOI\U    ivS 

''  *! 


i.U'V1S(;i.()u<:iAN^ 


PKKSIDKMIAL  ELECTION 
OF  1824 

ELECTORAL  VOTE 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTION  OF  18 

I.\  THE  IIOTSE  OK  KEPKESENTATIVES 
BY  STATES 


83 


ri^VM,  ^«>- 


;  ..^MX^-VP 


APKIL  23,  1828 

Against    \          Not  voting 

Vote  on  till  id  reading; 
absent  at  passage 
For  Against 


HOUSE  VOTE  ON  TARIFF  BILL 
APRIL  l(i.  1S84 


35 


38 


HOUSE  VOTE 

ON 

BANK  BILL 
OF  183:3 

Ayuinst 


90-  85° 


HOUSE  VOTE 

ON 

FORCE  BILL 
OF  1833 


~uV-^"    .ABtfuiT  N 

X'C  rJA      U      O       I)      I 


REMOVAL  OF 

SOUTIIERX  IXDIAXS 

183O-1834 


SO3          Lonitude  8(i0      West  from        80°        Greenwic 


39 


DISTRIBUTION 

OF 

POPULATION 
184O 

I  i  Cn,ter6  Jntmhitantt 

I  I  to  the  «,/.  mif< 

r— 1  c  Co  15  /,,/,,:l,,fants 

1.   .        I  tu  the  .«/.  mile 

45  n«i/  oner 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTION 

1836 

^  Harritrm  Wlii      73  uiiilJ  V.C.  Ij/a «»«>»,'  1 1 


40 


ROUTES  OF  THE 

UNDERGROU 
RAILROAI 

18SO -  1805 


»— s^r^o    <"      yZ-T^  ^1*         ••*  •'i>s~? 

SSiMS  "Tf^P: 

^Ja^g      V/rSU'S'^       \       ^*\  ?  I     \  "-• 

»/y§Mt  -%  I\<  S  =•   4          V  U  J     I  ^ZZ=^ 


V   \  ^  I       /  /  '  j.      ~  ^  - 

*^-^  -fevtVl^-^r*"' 2^3^,1     I 


-U.1X; 


42 


"^^fe?^^^ — /S|  1  ,s^t$| 
L  / 1  o/       ^*^^i;,,,,ft^'-^^^ 


Democrat,  —\  Winy, 

?asi,  127  Fc.te»    L':-1    ••.v'l  Taylv,  103  r«< 


/    ^u^^^^zg* 


tmmms^mff 


w  \^ 


45 


46 


47 


2  /  C 


48 


RAILROAD  LINES 
IN  ACTUAL,  OPERATION 

OCTOKER,  I860 

Based  on  Time-tables 
SCALE  OF  MILES 


In  operatiun,  185O 
Completed.  1150-1360 


Q 


85"  Longitude  Weat  from.  Greenwich 


49 


CENTRAL  AMERICA 

A>D 

ISTH3IIAX  ROUTES 
(184G-1S60) 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


50 


TEST  VOTE 
OX    THE 

KANSAS -NEBRASKA  BILL 

THE 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 
1854 


Tutal.no  mte.  100 

Not  voting  '|         | 


iffirmativ      ""^       Negative 


51 


American  Party 
Majority  ;.  Plurality  I  I  Minority  !*"+'+ *J 

llepublicaii  Party 
Majority  f\  Plurality  Minority 

Democratic  Party 

Majorit 


PARTY  SITUATIONS 

SHOWN   BY 

ELECTIONS  OF    IS55 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTION 
OE    1S5O 


52 


54 


ittle  Kock^)  \  y/BoUy  Sin-ing        \    luka  /      A\  I^-^V     BAM     A /  \   r    J,  n    „     ,.     T      .      •         c  A IJ  « L  I;--\  A 

\  Helens,*     MISSISSIPPI     I          ^^     \.  /      \  U    *•  CBton  ^v 

X \»r  T    I  L_»«_ ^ ^  S  \  86^  BO»M»>^l>.,   N.t.     _       82" 


56 


/  •?C~1 

H — ^..  _n_ 


SEAT  OF  WAR  IN  THE  KAST 
1861  -  1805 

SCALE  OF  MILES 


58 


SEAT  OF  WAR 

IX  THE   SOUTH 

1861  -  1865 

SCALE  OF  MILES     , 
25      50  100  150  200 


:NS«AVINS  co,  N.y. 


60 


61 


62 


CONGRESSIONAL  ELECTION 

OF  18G6 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 

Sulid  Anti-Arlminstratiun  Deleyation 
Artti- Admin strat ion  Majority 
Solid  Adminst ration  Delegation 
!iU  Atlminstratton  Majority 
•///^A  y,j  Representation 

Figures  show  number  of  members 


THE  PROCESS 
RECONSTRUCTION 


Upper  date,  d'n-ernment  recognized  by  Cunyi 


63 


K/{~Ti/Wff^:' 


r  §  s^*=^ 


ELECTION     OF     1876 

|  \Hepublican  IBS 

|  \Voiitf3ted,  but  assigned  to  Republican  2-J 

Democratic  184 


65 


66 


67 


69 


/-- f-.--t_        I    '    1 

i   3ni 


71 


73 


74 


75 


76 


77 


78 


79 


RECLAMATION 
1900-1917 


Forest  Reserves 
National  Parks 
National  Monuments 
Irrigation  Projects 
ervoirs 


DEVELOPMENT  OF 
1MER1CAX    INTERESTS 

IN  THE  PACIFIC 
1 701-1903 


80 


81 


MILITARY 
EXPEDITIONS 

IN    1917 


Snowing  approximately  the  Productive  Areas  of  principal  Agricultural  and  oth»r  Staples,  1912. 


J  >»<><  u  rejturt  <•/  (..  (  .  6'.  liurtttu  of  .- 


REGIONAL    DISTRIBUTION    OF    PI^pUCTS    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES 


83 


MAP   STUDIES 


LIST  OF   MAP   STUDIES 


STUDY  PAQB 

1.  The  Old  World:  Dissatisfaction  with  the 

Way  to  the  Indies  and  the  Way  to 
Heaven Ill 

2.  The  Discovery   of  America:    A  Strait- 

less  Barrier 112 

3.  The    Land:     "My    Country,    Tis    of 

Thee" 115 

4.  The  Pathfinders:  Spaniards  and  French 

men  Penetrate  the  Wilderness        .     .     119 

5.  The    Tobacco    Country:     Virginia    and 

Maryland 124 

6.  New  England :  The  Home  of  a  Maritime 

People 125 

7.  The  Dutch  and  Quaker  Colonies:   Great 

Grants  and  Small  Farms 127 

8.  The  Southern  Plantations:    The  Caro- 

linas  and  Georgia 129 

9.  Society   and   Commerce   in   the   Young 

American  Communities 131 

10.  Latin  or  Saxon?     The  Hundred  Years' 

War 134 

11.  Americans  for  America:   From  Irritation 

to  Independence 139 

12.  The  Revolutionary  War 142 


13.  Organizing  a  Nation:   From  Jealousy  to 

Confidence 143 

14.  The  New  Government  hi  Action    .     .     .     144 

15.  Agrarianism  and  Expansion:    Attention 

Turning  Toward  the  West      ....     148 

16.  The  Second  War  of  Independence  .     .     .     150 

17.  The  Settling  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  .     .     154 

18.  Sectionalism:     Economic    Development 

of  the  East 156 

19.  The  Plantation  Empire  and  the  Anti- 

slavery  Crusade 157 

20.  Manifest    Destiny:    Settlement,    Diplo 

macy,  and  War  Carry  the  Boundary 

to  the  Pacific 159 

21.  Slavery  and  the  Territories:    From  the 

Missouri  Compromise  to  Secession  .     .     165 

22.  The  Civil  War 167 

23.  The  Process  of  Reconstruction   ....     168 

24.  Creating  Wealth :  Mines,  Ranches,  Farms, 

Railroads,  Mills         170 

25.  Third  Parties  and  Other  Critics  of  "Big 

Business" 174 

26.  World  Power       176 

27.  Reforms  and  Enterprise  of  the  Twentieth 

Century  _. 179 


HARPER'S   ATLAS 
OF   AMERICAN    HISTORY 


MAN  can  no  more  be  scientifically  studied  apart  from  the  ground 
which  he  tills,  or  the  lands  over  which  he  travels,  or  the  sea  over 
which  he  trades,  than  polar  bear  or  desert  cactus  can  be  understood 
apart  from  its  habitat.  Man's  relations  to  his  environment  are  infinitely  more 
numerous  and  complex  than  those  of  the  most  highly  organized  plant  or  animal. 
So  complex  are  they  that  they  constitute  a  legitimate  and  necessary  object  of 
special  study.  The  investigation  which  they  receive  in  anthropology,  ethnology, 
sociology,  and  history,  so  far  as  history  undertakes  to  explain  the  causes  of  events, 
fails  to  reach  a  satisfactory  solution  of  their  problem  largely  because  the  geo 
graphic  factor  which  enters  into  them  all  has  not  been  thoroughly  analyzed.  Man 
has  been  so  noisy  about  the  way  he  has  '  conquered  Nature,'  and  Nature  has  been 
so  silent  in  her  persistent  influence  over  men,  that  the  geographic  factor  in  the 
equation  of  human  development  has  been  overlooked."1  In  these  words  the 
leading  American  exponent  of  the  science  of  Anthropogeography  lays  down  its 
dogma. 

The  winning  of  this  continent  was  less  a  conquest  than  an  adaptation.  The 
drama  of  man's  effort  has  been  conditioned  to  an  important  degree  by  the 
theater  that  he  has  played  it  in.  Indeed,  this  is  so  clearly  true  that  before  the 
statement  is  completed  it  is  branded  commonplace;  no  one  will  disagree  except 
those  poet-historians  who  sing  of  nothing  but  the  genius  of  a  people,  or  those 
transcendentalists  who  present  all  history  as  the  biography  of  great  men.  But 
though  the  "phrase  is  glibly  spoken,  it  generally  remains  the  wisdom  of  a  phrase; 
few  there  are  who  actually  attempt  to  understand  it  by  application  in  detail  to  the 
problems  of  history.  Yet  no  one  will  come  to  knowledge  of  the  growth  and  spread 
of  the  American  nation  from  a  few  small  shiploads  of  refugees  and  needy  immi 
grants  to  a  great  society  of  scores  of  millions,  without  again  and  again  referring 
to  this  factor. 

The  small  particulars  of  coast  line  and  hill  barrier,  the  even  reaches  of  pla- 

1  Ellen  Churchill  Semple,  Influence  of  Geographic  Environment  (New  York,  1911),  p.  2. 

101 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

teaus,  the  stretch  of  waterways,  the  forest  wilderness  and  open  prairie,  the  pos 
sibilities  of  produce  and  of  transportation — all  these  have  helped  or  hindered, 
often  quite  determined,  the  course  of  growth.  Without  a  constant  sense  of  these 
hard  and  steady  influences,  one  can  never  get  a  vivid  picture  of  the  frontier  moving 
westward  mile  by  mile  in  a  jagged,  ever-changing  line.  Without  it  one  can  never 
understand  the  specializing  of  our  economic  life  with  its  appropriate  variety  of 
social  customs;  or  those  antipathies,  almost  inevitable,  between  Americans,  who 
found  themselves  quite  capable  of  self-support,  and  the  English  government, 
which  looked  for  service  to  the  Empire;  or  those  between  our  own  communities, 
marked  off  into  sections  finally,  after  a  great  struggle,  knit  together  by  the  bonds 
of  commerce.  If  one  would  share  the  thought  of  leaders  in  senate  house,  in  mili 
tary  tent,  or  in  the  office  rooms  of  mills,  he  must  know  what  could  and  what 
could  not  be  done  upon  this  continent. 

No  one  will  get  a  reputation  for  originality  by  pointing  out  that  sectionalism 
has  been  a  very  important  factor  in  our  history.  The  consciousness  of  difference 
between  one  group  and  others,  set  off  by  walls  of  hills  or  by  mere  intervening 
distance,  or  distinguished  no  less  certainly  by  some  exclusive  uniformity  in  type 
of  thought  and  work,  has  been  so  marked  as  to  endanger  the  Union  time  after 
time.  In  nearly  every  section  in  one  decade  or  another  up  to  1876  the  central 
government  was  defied  because  some  special  hopes  or  needs  had  not  received  enough 
consideration.  To  understand  this  it  is  very  clear  that  the  map,  and  often  a  de 
tailed  map,  is  indispensable. 

Take,  for  example,  the  New  England  of  a  hundred  years  ago.  The  map 
of  the  geologist  shows  it  to  be  a  "united  field,"  a  rock-dust  soil  which  yields  good 
product  if  tilled  with  unremitting  labor.  The  contour  map  reveals  a  barrier 
ridge,  the  Litchfield  and  the  Berkshire  Hills,  some  sixty  miles  in  breadth  and 
about  twelve  hundred  feet  in  height,  supplemented  at  the  north  by  a  consider 
able  lake,  and  giving  a  degree  of  isolation — enough  to  interfere  with  an  internal 
trade,  though  not  enough  to  hold  back  penetrating  parties  of  home  seekers  trudging 
toward  the  West.1  The  coastal  survey  shows  a  multitude  of  fiord  harbors,  from 
which  men  were  drawn  to  sea  almost  as  irresistibly  as  from  Scandinavia.  "In 
New  England  the  deeply  embayed  coasts,  the  narrowness  of  the  lowland  belt,  and 
the  glaciated  soil  were  all  geographic  factors  operating  to  develop  maritime  life."2 
A  chart  of  ocean  streams  and  winds  makes  clear  the  fortunate  position  of  these 
ports  near  the  median  point  in  the  American  arc  of  that  great  current  which 
circles  around  the  whole  North  Atlantic  basin. 


1The  traveler  H.  B.  Fearon  (Sketches  of  America,  London,  1818,  p.  108)  says:  "Boston  is  not  a  thriving — i.e.,  an 
increasing — town;  it  wants  a  fertile  back  country  and  it  is  too  far  from  the  Western  states  to  be  engaged  in  the  supply 
of  that  new  and  vast  emporium,  except,  indeed,  with  inhabitants,  a  commodity  which,  I  am  informed,  they  send  in 
numbers  greater  than  from  any  other  quarter." 

*E.  C.  Sample,  American  History  and  Its  Geographic  Conditions  (Boston,  1903),  p.  120. 

102 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

The  Puritan  faced  out  from  his  hill  fence  at  the  west  through  the  front  doors 
of  his  harbors.  Here  was  a  people  of  a  common  stock  transplanted  whole  as 
a  community,  self-reliant  in  its  temper,  and  penetrated  with  a  sense  of  mission. 
Its  spiritual  aloofness,  which  had  not  passed  away  in  1815,  had  been  confirmed 
and  long  sustained  by  the  character  of  its  homeland.  It  seemed  an  ethnographic 
unit  on  a  geographic  unit — the  circumstances  of  a  nation — with  a  full  equipment 
of  the  self-satisfaction  which  all  nations  have.  In  the  first  years  of  the  nineteenth 
century  this  people  faced  away  from  the  west  toward  England,  just  as  for  a 
dozen  years  after  the  Revolution  the  pioneers  of  Tennessee  had  faced  away  from 
the  east  toward  Spain  beckoning  from  the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  The  "Essex 
Junto"  and  the  defiant  citizens  of  Franklin  are  equally  accounted  for  in  part 
by  the  configuration  of  the  earth's  crust. 

Examining  the  map  with  greater  care,  we  note  the  continuity  of  the  Con 
necticut  Valley  and,  by  reference  to  statistics  of  elections,  observe  here  a  com 
munity  stretching  from  the  Sound  to  Dartmouth  College,  preserving  the  mental 
state  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The  people  to  whom  this  was  distasteful  moved 
over  the  hills  and  far  away,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  orthodox;  the  New- 
Englandism  of  the  coastal  towns  was  softened  by  commercial  contact  with  the 
world;  but  the  Connecticut  Valley  folk,  cut  off  in  their  complacency,  long  went 
their  old,  tried,  customary  way.  The  district  of  Maine,  on  the  other  hand,  because 
it  was  a  frontier  region,  its  people  bitter  toward  their  urban  creditors,  discovered 
a  restless  spirit,  sent  Democratic  members  up  to  Boston  and  so  clamored  for 
home  rule  that  Boston  and  the  Valley  were  glad  to  see  it  go  in  1820.  That  there 
were  other  well-marked  sections  in  this  general  area,  like  the  interior  counties  of 
New  Hampshire,  or  the  sterile  plains  and  bogs  of  southeastern  Massachusetts, 
is  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  maps  of  Doctor  Libby,  included  in  this  book,  on 
the  vote  for  and  against  the  Federal  Constitution,  or  in  the  tables  of  votes  recorded 
in  modern  monographic  studies  of  New  England  history.1 

By  tracing  in  the  "fall  line,"  where  the  tumbling  rivers  from  the  mountains 
make  their  final  plunge  before  their  short  glide  to  the  sea,  one  notices  the  fortunate 
proximity  of  power  to  the  highway  of  the  ships,  making  manufacturing  doubly 
profitable  through  facilities  of  distribution.  After  reading  an  account  of  the 
industrial  expansion  of  a  century  ago,  a  dozen  dots  placed  properly  here  and 
there  along  the  line,  vividly  record  the  growth  of  mill  towns.  Even  little  Rhode 
Island,  scarcely  more  extensive  than  the  average  county  of  its  larger  neighbors, 
had  both  waterfalls  and  harbors  within  its  close  constricted  borders.  Indeed, 
sometimes,  as  in  Pawtucket,  ships  and  water  wheels  were  found  within  the  con- 

1See,  e.g.,  R.  S.  Purcell,  Connecticut  in  Transition  (Washington,  1918),  pp.  97,  349,  412;  A.  E.  Morse,  The  Federalist 
Party  to  the  Year  1800  (Princeton,  190*),  p.  179;  W.  A.  Robinson,  Jeffersonian  Democracy  in  New  England  (New  Haven, 
1916),  pp.  162-165;  S.  B.  Harding,  Massachusetts  and  the  Federal  Constitution  (New  York,  1896);  F.  G.  Bates,  Rhode  Island 
and  the  Formation  of  the  Union  (New  York,  1898). 

103 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

fines  of  a  single  town.  The  harnessing  of  power,  New  England's  inevitable  answer 
to  the  embargo,  seemed  another  count  toward  self-sufficiency  to  the  men  of  1815; 
but  they  misunderstood  its  tendency.  Through  their  household  industries  sup 
plemented  by  their  English  trade,  they  had  before  been  largely  independent; 
the  new  release  of  energy  in  the  mills  forced  them  into  contact  with  the  lands 
beyond  the  Hudson.  A  glance  at  a  "wool  map"  would  make  clear  how  necessary 
now  was  connection,  by  the  long  canals,  with  western  New  York  and,  afterward, 
Ohio,  whose  flocks  produced  the  fleece  that  the  Eastern  looms  could  turn  to  gold. 
And  more  important  was  the  new  relation  with  the  cotton  kingdom,  whose  fleets 
plied  back  and  forth  between  New  Orleans  and  Boston.  As  industry  diversified, 
a  growing  consciousness  of  poverty  in  mineral  resources  also  must  have  chastened 
any  heady  craving  for  a  life  apart.  By  manufacturing,  as  easily  can  be  traced  out 
on  a  map,  New  England  had  been  emancipated  from  itself. 

Everywhere  throughout  the  country  there  have  flourished  these  sectional 
antipathies,  impossible  to  understand  without  the  map,  whether  we  turn  to  the 
east  and  west  of  the  old  South,  or  north  and  south  in  the  old  Northwest,  or  to 
any  other  state  or  part.  The  spirit  has  been  felt  in  the  far  West,  for  "during 
the  progress  of  the  Civil  War  there  were  frequent  rumors  that  the  people  of  the 
isolated  Pacific  slope,  who  had  for  ten  years  in  vain  demanded  overland  com 
munication,  intended  erecting  an  independent  republic."1  It  was  the  railroad, 
the  bonds  of  steel,  that  finally  made  sectionalism  no  longer  really  dangerous  to 
American  unity. 

Turnpikes,  canals,  and  railroads  shrunk  the  earth  and  drew  its  people  into 
contact,  making  possible  and  easy  the  exchange  of  things  and  thoughts.  Since 
culture  grows  with  imitating  new  and  better  ways,  the  American  life,  broadened 
and  enriched  by  this  communication,  was  leveled  upward  by  the  mutual  aid  of 
the  sturdy  individualism  of  the  Western  pioneer,  the  habit  of  social  and  economic 
organization  in  the  East,  and  the  dignified  tradition  of  public  service  in  the  South. 
Doubtless  each  patriot  in  the  early  nineteenth  century  thought  that  sectionalism 
was  a  curse  upon  his  country  and  mourned  because  the  other  sections  willfully 
refused  to  grow  like  his.  Where  an  institution  such  as  slavery  was  of  great  vitality 
and  yet  utterly  incompatible  with  the  settled  modes  of  living  in  the  other  areas, 
the  result,  it  is  too  true,  was  tragic,  especially  when  one  reflects  that  African 
slavery  was  the  easiest,  but  not  the  only  possible,  solution  of  the  problems  of  pro 
duction  in  the  South.  But,  with  this  exception,  the  diversity  of  culture  caused  or 
aided  by  geographic  difference  has  been  beneficial.  And  modern  communication 
has  fortunately  not  obliterated  the  peculiarities  of  sections. 

Despite  the  sectional  animosities  which  have  raged  in  times  now  fortunately 
past,  the  land  seems  formed  for  a  great  and  a  united  people.  No  Italic  or  Iberian 

1 E.  E.  Sparks,  The  Expansion  of  the  American  People  (Chicago   1900),  p.  368. 

104 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

peninsula  here  presents  the  proper  basis  for  a  separate  stock.  The  Chesapeake 
and  Delaware  Bays  lead  gently  into,  but  certainly  do  not  divide,  our  country 
as  they  might  were  they  of  such  proportions  as  the  Red  or  Baltic  Seas.  The  pious 
John  Jay  out  of  this  conviction  wrote  a  paragraph  in  the  second  paper  of  the 
Federalist:  "This  country  and  this  people  seem  to  have  been  made  for  each  other, 
and  it  appears  as  if  it  was  the  design  of  Providence  that  an  inheritance  so  proper 
and  convenient  for  a  band  of  brethren,  united  to  one  another  by  the  strongest  ties, 
should  never  be  split  into  a  number  of  unsocial,  jealous,  and  alien  sovereignties." 
The  German  geographer  Karl  Ritter  has  remarked  that  the  mountain  ranges 
which  sever  people  in  Eurasia  run  along  parallels  of  latitude,  making  homogeneous 
and  comparatively  undiversified  societies.  But  in  America,  where  they  run  along 
meridians,  "they  unite  and  mingle  peoples  of  different  climates,  and  hint  at  the 
development  of  a  national  life  of  far  greater  richness  and  variety  than  the  Old 
World  can  show."1  It  is  this  integrity  of  territory  made  up  of  many  parts — 
E  pluribus  unum — with  its  unescapable  suggestion  of  destiny,  which  has  been  the 
theme  of  many  a  sublime  oration,  from  those  of  Webster  down. 

It  may  seem  that  American  society  will  soon  become  quite  homogeneous. 
The  stream  of  immigration  from  across  the  sea,  which,  notwithstanding  eddies 
in  the  port  towns,  really  does  diverge  throughout  the  land,  carries  strangers  every 
where.  The  ease  of  change  in  residence  to  meet  new  opportunities  for  the  in 
dividual  encourages  an  unprecedented  moving  here  and  there.  But  sooner  or 
later,  it  may  be  assumed,  with  the  more  even  development  of  the  country,  this 
kaleidoscopic  whirl  will  come  to  rest  and  population  reach,  more  or  less,  an  equi 
poise.  Then  we  will  have  to  study  our  maps  again  in  the  same  old  way,  for  sec 
tionalism,  though  of  a  kind  mild  and  advantageous  to  the  whole,  must  be  the 
result  of  geographical  sections.  He  who  would  understand  America  of  the 
twentieth  century,  as  he  who  studies  that  of  the  nineteenth,  must  learn  of  her 
climates  and  her  soils,  and,  probably,  despite  the  airplane,  her  highways  on  the 
railroad  levels  and  the  navigable  rivers. 

Though  the  geography  and  the  history  of  the  United  States  are  learned 
along  with  decimals  and  the  rules  of  grammar  in  the  elementary  school,  too  often 
the  knowledge  of  these  subjects  remains  as  insulated  in  the  two  sealed  compart 
ments  of  the  mind.  Yet  in  maturer  years,  a  review,  however  hasty,  shows  clearly 
their  connection  and  how  necessary  is  the  former  to  an  understanding  of  the  latter. 
The  map  that  would  illustrate  the  interests  of  colonial  New  England  must  include 
the  fishing  banks  of  Newfoundland,  the  islands  of  the  Caribbean,  the  Guinea 
coast  of  Africa,  and  the  British  ports,  as  properly  as  the  stern  and  rockbound 
coast,  on  which,  the  poetess  has  told  us,  the  breaking  waves  dashed  high.  When 
one  has  traced  out  how  food  produce  went  from  Massachusetts  to  the  specialized 


1 R.  E.  Thompson,  The  Hand  of  God  in  American  History  (New  York,  1902),  p.  7. 

105 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

fines  of  a  single  town.  The  harnessing  of  power,  New  England's  inevitable  answer 
to  the  embargo,  seemed  another  count  toward  self-sufficiency  to  the  men  of  1815; 
but  they  misunderstood  its  tendency.  Through  their  household  industries  sup 
plemented  by  their  English  trade,  they  had  before  been  largely  independent; 
the  new  release  of  energy  in  the  mills  forced  them  into  contact  with  the  lands 
beyond  the  Hudson.  A  glance  at  a  "wool  map"  would  make  clear  how  necessary 
now  was  connection,  by  the  long  canals,  with  western  New  York  and,  afterward, 
Ohio,  whose  flocks  produced  the  fleece  that  the  Eastern  looms  could  turn  to  gold. 
And  more  important  was  the  new  relation  with  the  cotton  kingdom,  whose  fleets 
plied  back  and  forth  between  New  Orleans  and  Boston.  As  industry  diversified, 
a  growing  consciousness  of  poverty  in  mineral  resources  also  must  have  chastened 
any  heady  craving  for  a  life  apart.  By  manufacturing,  as  easily  can  be  traced  out 
on  a  map,  New  England  had  been  emancipated  from  itself. 

Everywhere  throughout  the  country  there  have  flourished  these  sectional 
antipathies,  impossible  to  understand  without  the  map,  whether  we  turn  to  the 
east  and  west  of  the  old  South,  or  north  and  south  in  the  old  Northwest,  or  to 
any  other  state  or  part.  The  spirit  has  been  felt  in  the  far  West,  for  "during 
the  progress  of  the  Civil  War  there  were  frequent  rumors  that  the  people  of  the 
isolated  Pacific  slope,  who  had  for  ten  years  in  vain  demanded  overland  com 
munication,  intended  erecting  an  independent  republic."1  It  was  the  railroad, 
the  bonds  of  steel,  that  finally  made  sectionalism  no  longer  really  dangerous  to 
American  unity. 

Turnpikes,  canals,  and  railroads  shrunk  the  earth  and  drew  its  people  into 
contact,  making  possible  and  easy  the  exchange  of  things  and  thoughts.  Since 
culture  grows  with  imitating  new  and  better  ways,  the  American  life,  broadened 
and  enriched  by  this  communication,  was  leveled  upward  by  the  mutual  aid  of 
the  sturdy  individualism  of  the  Western  pioneer,  the  habit  of  social  and  economic 
organization  in  the  East,  and  the  dignified  tradition  of  public  service  in  the  South. 
Doubtless  each  patriot  in  the  early  nineteenth  century  thought  that  sectionalism 
was  a  curse  upon  his  country  and  mourned  because  the  other  sections  willfully 
refused  to  grow  like  his.  Where  an  institution  such  as  slavery  was  of  great  vitality 
and  yet  utterly  incompatible  with  the  settled  modes  of  living  in  the  other  areas, 
the  result,  it  is  too  true,  was  tragic,  especially  when  one  reflects  that  African 
slavery  was  the  easiest,  but  not  the  only  possible,  solution  of  the  problems  of  pro 
duction  in  the  South.  But,  with  this  exception,  the  diversity  of  culture  caused  or 
aided  by  geographic  difference  has  been  beneficial.  And  modern  communication 
has  fortunately  not  obliterated  the  peculiarities  of  sections. 

Despite  the  sectional  animosities  which  have  raged  in  times  now  fortunately 
past,  the  land  seems  formed  for  a  great  and  a  united  people.  No  Italic  or  Iberian 

1 E.  E.  Sparks,  The  Expansion  of  the  American  People  (Chicago   1900),  p.  368. 

104 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

peninsula  here  presents  the  proper  basis  for  a  separate  stock.  The  Chesapeake 
and  Delaware  Bays  lead  gently  into,  but  certainly  do  not  divide,  our  country 
as  they  might  were  they  of  such  proportions  as  the  Red  or  Baltic  Seas.  The  pious 
John  Jay  out  of  this  conviction  wrote  a  paragraph  in  the  second  paper  of  the 
Federalist:  "This  country  and  this  people  seem  to  have  been  made  for  each  other, 
and  it  appears  as  if  it  was  the  design  of  Providence  that  an  inheritance  so  proper 
and  convenient  for  a  band  of  brethren,  united  to  one  another  by  the  strongest  ties, 
should  never  be  split  into  a  number  of  unsocial,  jealous,  and  alien  sovereignties." 
The  German  geographer  Karl  Ritter  has  remarked  that  the  mountain  ranges 
which  sever  people  in  Eurasia  run  along  parallels  of  latitude,  making  homogeneous 
and  comparatively  undi versified  societies.  But  in  America,  where  they  run  along 
meridians,  "they  unite  and  mingle  peoples  of  different  climates,  and  hint  at  the 
development  of  a  national  life  of  far  greater  richness  and  variety  than  the  Old 
World  can  show."1  It  is  this  integrity  of  territory  made  up  of  many  parts — 
E  pluribus  unum — with  its  unescapable  suggestion  of  destiny,  which  has  been  the 
theme  of  many  a  sublime  oration,  from  those  of  Webster  down. 

It  may  seem  that  American  society  will  soon  become  quite  homogeneous. 
The  stream  of  immigration  from  across  the  sea,  which,  notwithstanding  eddies 
in  the  port  towns,  really  does  diverge  throughout  the  land,  carries  strangers  every 
where.  The  ease  of  change  in  residence  to  meet  new  opportunities  for  the  in 
dividual  encourages  an  unprecedented  moving  here  and  there.  But  sooner  or 
later,  it  may  be  assumed,  with  the  more  even  development  of  the  country,  this 
kaleidoscopic  whirl  will  come  to  rest  and  population  reach,  more  or  less,  an  equi 
poise.  Then  we  will  have  to  study  our  maps  again  in  the  same  old  way,  for  sec 
tionalism,  though  of  a  kind  mild  and  advantageous  to  the  whole,  must  be  the 
result  of  geographical  sections.  He  who  would  understand  America  of  the 
twentieth  century,  as  he  who  studies  that  of  the  nineteenth,  must  learn  of  her 
climates  and  her  soils,  and,  probably,  despite  the  airplane,  her  highways  on  the 
railroad  levels  and  the  navigable  rivers. 

Though  the  geography  and  the  history  of  the  United  States  are  learned 
along  with  decimals  and  the  rules  of  grammar  in  the  elementary  school,  too  often 
the  knowledge  of  these  subjects  remains  as  insulated  in  the  two  sealed  compart 
ments  of  the  mind.  Yet  in  maturer  years,  a  review,  however  hasty,  shows  clearly 
their  connection  and  how  necessary  is  the  former  to  an  understanding  of  the  latter. 
The  map  that  would  illustrate  the  interests  of  colonial  New  England  must  include 
the  fishing  banks  of  Newfoundland,  the  islands  of  the  Caribbean,  the  Guinea 
coast  of  Africa,  and  the  British  ports,  as  properly  as  the  stern  and  rockbound 
coast,  on  which,  the  poetess  has  told  us,  the  breaking  waves  dashed  high.  When 
one  has  traced  out  how  food  produce  went  from  Massachusetts  to  the  specialized 

1 R.  E.  Thompson,  The  Hand  of  God  in  American  History  (New  York,  1902),  p.  7. 

105 


.HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

plantations  of  the  Antilles,  there  making  possible  the  staple  cargoes  to  the  Eng 
lish  mills,  which  in  their  turn  sent  finished  goods  back  across  three  thousand 
miles  of  sea  to  Boston,  one  contemplates  a  great  triangle  of  trade.  Later,  it  is 
observed,  this  three-cornered  commerce  was  transferred  westward  to  the  con 
tinent  itself.  The  farmers  of  the  old  Northwest  sent  raft-loads  of  cereals  and  pork 
and  beef  down  the  Mississippi  to  the  lower  South  to  sustain  the  toilers  who  pro 
duced  the  cotton  for  the  spindles  by  the  Merrimac,  whence  came  the  calicoes, 
which,  slowly  freighted  by  wagon  and  canal  boat,  were  finally  to  clothe  the 
mistresses  of  Indiana  cabins.  This  diagram  upon  an  outline  map  reveals  one 
reason  for  the  indifference  to  the  wrongs  of  slavery  prevalent  in  sections  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  Ohio  Valley,  a  sentiment  somewhat  reformed  when  railroads 
gave  the  West  a  direct  market  hi  the  Eastern  towns,  with  possibilities  of  exportation. 

The  graphic  record  of  migration  will  clearly  show  that  the  configuration  of 
the  land,  and  not  the  man-made  boundaries  of  states,  is  what  marks  out  the  areas 
of  settlement — why  upper  Illinois  belongs  in  taste  and  tradition  more  with  Wis 
consin  than  with  "Egypt,"  caught  between  the  rivers  in  the  southern  part  of  that 
same  commonwealth;  and  why  Cattaraugus  and  Chautauqua  Counties  in  New 
York  are  culturally  one  with  Erie,  Crawford,  Warren,  and  McKean  across  the 
Pennsylvania  line.  It  demonstrates  why  the  valley  walled  in  by  the  ridges  of  the 
Appalachians,  rising  steadily  to  a  plateau  as  one  journeys  southward  from  the 
Monongahela,1  was  settled  through  its  length  by  Germans  and  Scotch-Irish,  who, 
untouched  by  loyalties  to  governments  seated  near  the  coast  of  their  respective 
provinces,  became  a  force  for  nationalism. 

The  comparison  of  areas  shaded  to  set  forth  the  tariff  votes  throughout 
the  nineteenth  century,  with  those  which  show  the  distribution  of  extractive 
industry  that  could  not  well  be  satisfied  with  a  home  market,  requires  no  com 
mentary,  nor  does  that  of  maps  which  locate  silver  mines  with  those  which  give 
the  districts  which  supported  Mr.  Bryan.  Then,  too,  the  location  of  one's  home 
is  oftentimes  an  index  as  well  as  a  conditioning  influence.  At  a  meeting  of  the 
American  Historical  Association  in  1917,  Prof.  F.  J.  Turner  displayed  some  maps 
designed  to  show  how  in  the  old  Northwest  the  line  marking  the  extent  of  the 
glacier,  which  throughout  its  breadth  enriched  the  soil  with  silt,  likewise  was  the 
boundary  of  a  higher  grade  of  literacy.  The  kind  of  men  who  lacked  the  "push" 
to  move  out  of  the  barren  area  beyond  the  line  had  not  the  enterprise  to  learn 
to  read  and  write. 

The  student,  with  a  map  before  him,  marks  how  the  French,  lured  on  by 
easy  water  reaches,  scattered  their  settlement  to  an  exhausting  thinness,  while 
the  English  were  checked  by  obstacles  of  earth  and  man.  He  notices  that  the 


1  C.  H.  Merriam,  Life  Zones  and  Crop  Zonet  of  the  United  States,  U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agriculture,  Div.  of  Biological  Survey, 
Bulletin  No.  10,  pp.  20-S&4,  30-36. 

106 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

• 

valley  of  the  Genesee  remained  a  wilderness  until,  with  Sullivan's  raid,  the  Iroquois 
were  crushed.  He  sees  the  settlements  to  the  south  were,  as  a  whole,  held  back 
by  the  Alleghany  ridges,  which,  though  not  high,  presented  a  broad  and  shaggy 
barrier  to  set  a  bound  to  any  hasty  spread  until  the  coastal  colonies,  growing  strong 
by  reason  of  their  fertile  soil  and  well-indented  coast,  could  serve  securely  as  a 
base.  From  a  military  point  of  view  the  French  with  their  communication  routes 
and,  in  the  later  phase,  interior  lines,  were  better  placed,  but  the  numbers  from 
the  close-compacted  English  settlements  finally  overwhelmed  them.  It  is  true, 
then,  that  "Nature  has  persistently  influenced  the  course  of  man's  development." 

So  numerous  and  so  striking  are  the  examples  of  this  influence  that  one  who 
reads,  with  long  and  serious  attention  to  the  map,  the  narrative  of  man's  achieve 
ment,  is  likely  to  conclude  that  human  history,  like  ecology,  is  a  science  which 
concerns  itself  only  with  how  environment  conditions  life  growth.  There  have 
been  earnest  essays  to  prove  that  all  civilization  is  a  geographic  fact — "Der  mensch 
ist  was  er  isst" — that  all  the  hopes  and  fears  of  history  are  but  phases  of  the 
stern  struggle  for  existence  upon  the  lands  and  waters  of  the  earth.  Some  his 
torians,  like  Henry  Thomas  Buckle,  have  maintained  that  man's  physical  sur 
roundings  have  determined  his  major  motives  not  only  through  his  economic  life, 
but  in  what  we  call  aesthetic,  intellectual,  and  religious  interests  as  well — that  the 
stormy  climates  make  one  superstitious,  and  smiling  skies  and  placid  hills  hearten 
man  to  poetry.  "In  India,  man  was  intimidated;  in  Greece,  he  was  encouraged."1 

"The  mountains  made  men  free,"  writes  Buckle.  But  the  answer  comes 
that  those  who  would  be  free  fled  to  the  mountains.  "It  may  be,"  remarks  Pro 
fessor  Adams,2  "that  when  England  has  become  a  memory  and  Holland  a  myth, 
the  advocate  of  geographic  environment  will  find  in  the  rocks  and  in  the  chilling 
mists  of  New  England  the  forces  that  created  the  Puritan  conscience  and  dwarfed 
his  emotion."  There  is  danger,  then,  that  too  much  contemplation  of  the  map 
may  lead  to  a  one-sided  "interpretation"  of  history,  if  it  is  not  balanced  with 
some  common  sense.  The  Rev.  H.  B.  George,  a  brilliant  student*  of  the  subject,3 
remarks  by  way  of  illustration:  "It  has  been  said  that  the  long  political  predom 
inance  of  feudal  aristocracy  was  only  possible  in  fairly  level  countries.  This  is 
so  far  true  that  their  military  strength  could  only  be  effectively  exerted  in  regions 
fit  for  mailed  horsemen  to  fight  in.  It  would,  however,  be  preposterous  to  at 
tribute  the  origin  of  feudalism  to  the  influence  of  the  plains.  One  has  never 
heard  that  the  Mongols,  who  were  all  horsemen  and  came  off  the  boundless  steppes, 

1  H.  T.  Buckle,  History  of  Civilization  in  England  (New  York,  1884),  vol.  i,  p.  100.  The  influence  of  geographic  environ 
ment  over  character  is  discussed  in  pp.  86-108.  Other  scholars  have  written  to  show  that  such  gently  rolling  country  as 
that  of  Suabia  and  Thuringia  produces  artists,  whereas  the  grandeur  of  the  Alps  seems  to  overpower  and  stunt  the  imagi 
nation  to  a  degree  that  the  Swiss  make  little  contribution  to  the  arts;  see  Heinrich  von  Treitschke,  Politik  (Leipzig,1897), 
vol.  i.  p.  225. 

!  E.  D.  Adams,  The  Power  of  Ideals  in  American  History  (New  Haven,  1912),  p.  x. 

*  H.  B.  George,  The  Relation*  of  Geography  and  History  (Oxford,  1919),  p.  14. 

107 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

developed  any  feudal  ideas,  or  even  the  less  barbarous  Cossacks  of  later  ages." 
"Circumstances,"  says  another  English  scholar,  "can  unmake,  but  of  them 
selves  they  never  yet  made  man,  or  any  other  form  of  life."1 

Despite  this  caution  it  remains  true  that  man  cannot  "be  scientifically 
studied  apart  from  the  ground  which  he  tills,  or  the  lands  over  which  he  travels,  or 
the  seas  over  which  he  trades."  But  this  philosophical  reason  is  not  the  only  one  for 
setting  the  atlas  side  by  side  with  the  historical  narrative.  Even  if  one  thought 
as  little  of  environment  as  Carlyle  or  Emerson,  a  careful  study  would  still  be  in 
dispensable.  Human  influences,  too,  can  be  indicated  on  a  map.  Certain  lines 
of  the  Underground  Railroad  are  seen  to  have  run  near  Quaker  settlements,  votes 
for  liberty  and  union  in  the  crisis  of  1860  are  recorded  to  the  credit  of  the  German 
immigrants  in  Missouri  and  Illinois.  The  geographical  distribution  of  the  New 
England  conscience  had  something  to  do  with  the  spread  of  anti-masonry  and  the 
abolition  movement. 

Neither  can  the  action  of  men  be  traced  if  one  refuses  to  learn  where  they 
acted.  To  understand  the  story  of  a  war  or  peaceful  progress,  one  must  know 
place  names  and  have  a  fairly  accurate  sense  of  distances.  Unless  one  can  picture 
with  precision  the  political  boundaries  of  colonies  and  states,  and  the  location 
of  rivers,  bays,  forts,  and  towns,  the  reading  of  history  is  the  mere  mumbling  of 
words.  Est  locus  in  rebus.  When  in  reading  of  the  old  South  the  student  finds  a 
reference  to  the  people  of  the  piney  woods  of  Alabama,  he  misses  some  of  the  sig 
nificance  if  he  thinks  that  they  were  mountaineers.  He  may  become  confused, 
in  studying  the  expansion  toward  the  West,  if  he  thinks  that  the  Cumberland 
Road  was  built  through  Cumberland  Gap.  He  will  be  puzzled  as  he  reads  of  the 
exploits  of  Gen.  Zachary  Taylor  and  Commodore  Sloat,  unless  he  knows  that 
there  were  two  towns  in  Mexico  named  Monterey.  He  is  apt  to  be  misled  in  fol 
lowing  Grant's  campaigns,  if  he -supposes  Pittsburg  Landing  to  be  in  southwestern 
Pennsylvania.  Historical  facts  are  localized  facts,  and  precision  in  this  respect 
is  especially  essential  in  American  history,  which  is  so  much  an  evolution  in  space 
as  well  as  time. 

In  Mark  Twain's  tale  of  the  adventures  of  Tom  Sawyer  Abroad,  the  hero  and 
the  faithful  Huckleberry  Finn  are  represented  steering  eastward  from  the  Missis 
sippi  in  an  airship.  After  sailing  several  hours  they  fall  into  a  fierce  contention 
as  to  the  state  that  they  are  passing  over.  Finn  believes  that  by  this  time  they 
must  have  reached  at  least  to  Indiana,  but  his  companion,  with  pity  for  this 
ignorance,  retorts  that  they  cannot  yet  be  past  the  boundary  of  Illinois,  for,  as 
they  look  down,  do  they  not  see  a  stretching  space  of  green?  And  in  the  map 
book  they  have  studied  is  this  not  the  color  which  marks  the  state  of  Illinois? 
Many  students  look  upon  a  map  in  a  fashion  scarcely  less  absurd.  When  this 

1R.  R.  Marrett,  Anthropology,  p.  129. 

108 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 

type  of  student  reads  that  Lincoln  moved  in  1830  from  Indiana  into  Illinois,  he 
merely  draws  a  line  an  inch  long  from  a  yellow  state  into  a  green  one,  without  the 
slightest  effort  in  imagination,  to  visualize  the  little  family  trudging  beside  their 
wagon  on  the  narrow,  sloughy  pathway  leading  through  the  forest  from  one  clearing 
to  another. 

Something  may  be  said  for  the  old  maps  which  pictured  ships,  sea  serpents, 
bears,  woods,  and  houses,  for  they  prodded  up  the  laggard  fancy  to  some  con 
ception  of  the  regions  that  they  indicated.  The  map  to  have  a  meaning  must 
be  regarded  as  a  symbol.  When  the  student,  drawing  in  a  line  to  mark  the  route 
of  Daniel  Boone,  comes  to  the  pass  through  the  Alleghanies,  he  must  be  forcibly 
reminded  of  that  important  day  in  the  history  of  America  when  this  resolute 
pioneer  looked  out  upon  a  billowy  sea  of  tree  tops,  with  the  same  thrill  at  scanning 
boundless  space  that  must  have  stirred  the  soul  of  Balboa  on  the  peak  of  Darien. 
"I  had  gained  the  summit  of  a  commanding  ridge,  and,  looking  round  with 
astonishing  delight,  beheld  the  ample  plains,  the  beauteous  tracts  below."  As 
later  with  his  pencil  he  follows  Lewis  and  Clark,  or  Captain  Pike,  or  the  dashing 
Colonel  Fremont,  he  will  likewise  come  to  feel  something  of  what  American  history 
has  meant — if  he  has  the  type  of  mind  to  which  a  map  can  mean  more  than  black 
lines  printed  on  white  paper. 

The  student  often  looks  upon  map  study  as  the  dryest  kind  of  drudgery, 
wasting  time  which  might  be  better  used.  And  if  map  study  is  to  degenerate, 
as  it  too  frequently  does,  into  the  mere  slavish  copying  of  meaningless  lines  and 
colors  from  an  atlas,  such  a  viewpoint  is  in  large  measure  justified.  But  that 
lies  with  the  student  himself.  Certainly  the  course  of  studies  which  accompanies 
these  maps  is  planned  to  serve  a  wider  purpose.  From  time  to  time  comments 
are  included  as  suggestions  in  interpretation  or  to  introduce  related  reading,  and 
opportunity  is  often  given  to  set  down  in  graphic  form  the  statements  of  the 
printed  page,  sometimes  from  the  text  and  sometimes  from  other  accessible  books 
or  from  extracts  reprinted  with  the  map  directions.  Generally  these  directions 
are  intended  to  give  a  sense  of  sequence  so  that  the  student  may  more  truly  seem 
to  illustrate  a  process,  to  show  how  this  land  comes  into  history,  and  how  that. 
In  short,  the  maps  may  prove  a  kind  of  laboratory  where  the  student  may  himself 
discover  and  indicate  the  forces  which  have  interplayed  to  make  this  nation. 


GENERAL   DIRECTIONS 

THERE  is  one  general  direction  of  the  first  importance:  THE  FULLEST 
AND  MOST  INTELLIGIBLE  ILLUSTRATIVE  MAP  IS  DESIRED  IN  EACH  STUDY. 
Do  not  content  yourself  with  doing  the  things  specifically  directed. 

The  student  is  to  provide  himself  with  outline  maps  on  which  all  data  are  to 
be  presented.  Care  and  thought  will  be  necessary  to  make  the  maps  not  only 
satisfactory  aesthetically,  but  to  make  them  intelligible  illustrations  as  well;  when 
the  scale  of  the  map  is  considered,  the  wandering  of  a  quarter  of  an  inch  may  mean 
an  error  of  fifty  miles  or  more,  which  sometimes  is  important.  The  student  is 
advised  to  use  inks  of  different  colors  whenever  possible,  or  at  least  to  keep  his 
colored  pencils  very  sharp.  An  advantage  of  using  ink  lining  or  water  color  for 
an  area  is  that  single  lines  to  show  a  route  or  boundary  may  be  laid  across  them, 
which  is  not  true  when  the  masses  are  laid  in  with  wax  pencils.  The  good  taste 
of  the  student  must  be  relied  upon  in  the  placing  of  his  color  values.  Satisfactory 
results  may  often  be  obtained  by  careful  cross-hatching  and  with  lines  of  different 
character.  Lettering  should  always  be  done  in  neat,  plain  print,  and,  as  often  as 
possible,  imposed  upon  the  map  itself,  though  when  this  might  seem  to  produce 
confusion  a  key  sheet  may  be  pinned  or  pasted  to  the  map. 

It  will  be  found  desirable  always  to  read  through  the  directions  before  be 
ginning,  so  that  devices  may  be  hit  upon  to  take  care  of  overlapping  areas  before 
it  is  too  late. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  1 


THE  OLD  WORLD:   DISSATISFACTION  WITH  THE  WAY  TO  THE  INDIES 

AND  THE  WAY  TO  HEAVEN 

TEXT:  Cheyney,  European  Background  of  American  History,  chaps,  i-iii;  Hayes,  History  of  Modern 

Europe,  vol.  i,  pp.  27-28,  43-49;    Bassett,  pp.  24,  26-27. 
MAPS:  Asia  and  Europe. 

Way  to  the  Indies. — The  principal  eco-     Hainan,  Indo-China,  and  the  Malay  Peninsula, 

he  reached  Malacca,  beyond  which  Chinese  traders 
seldom  ventured.  In  these  ancient  towns  of  Peking, 
Quinsay,  and  Zayton,  for  a  time  the  Mohammedan 
traders  had  their  agencies,  and,  due  in  part  to  the 
enterprise  of  missionary  priests,  likewise  the  Italian. 
But  about  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
as  far  as  Europe  was  concerned,  "night  descended 
upon  the  farther  East,  covering  Cathay,  with 
those  cities  of  which  the  old  travelers  had  told 
such  marvels."  The  great  importance  of  Marco 
Polo's  book  was  that  it  kept  before  the  minds  of 
scholarly  priests  and  navigators  the  memory  that 
far,  far  to  the  east  was  a  land  of  fabulous  riches 
and  teeming  population.  Out  of  that  mysterious 
country,  of  course,  there  continued  to  come  bales 
of  silks  and  herbs,  and  trinkets  wrought  with  in 
credible  cunning,  but  the  Westerners  who  read 
old  books  could  not  but  reflect  that  if  some  easier 
road  could  be  discovered,  relations  could  be  closer, 
exchange  much  more  convenient,  and  the  cause 
of  God  and  man  would  be  well  served. 

Show  (1)  two  possible  routes  by  caravan  and 
ship  from  Yarkand  to  Constantinople;  (2)  the  route 
of  a  cargo  of  nutmegs,  mace,  and  cloves  from  the 
Moluccas,  or  Spice  Islands,  to  Venice,  picking  up 
rare  woods  in  Farther  India,  cinnamon  at  Ceylon, 
pepper  on  the  Malabar  Coast,  aloes  and  ambergris 
at  Socotra,  and  emeralds  at  Berenice  (where  the 
goods  were  carried  overland  from  the  Red  Sea 
to  the  Nile);  (3)  the  route  of  packets  of  jewels 
from  Pulicat  and  Calicut  to  Antioch,  locating  the 
principal  markets  touched.  Show  the  position  in 
Central  India  of  the  kingdom  of  Golconda,  then 
the  great  diamond  center  of  the  world.  Locate 


nomic  cause  of  the  Commercial  Revolution 
was  the  desire  of  the  nations  of  Western  Europe  to 
share  in  the  trade  of  the  Orient  by  finding  new 
routes  to  the  lands  of  spices,  silks,  and  gold.  Long 
before,  the  Crusades  had  introduced  these  riches 
and  refinements  to  the  knowledge  of  the  northern 
barons,  and  a  taste  thus  formed  had  grown  until 
they  were  considered  indispensable.  More  and  more 
merchants  were  involved  in  the  trade  as  the  years 
went  on,  and  as  the  towns  grew  in  size  and  number 
concern  as  to  the  cheapness  and  safety  of  the 
trade  routes  naturally  grew  as  well.  This  map 
study  is  devised  to  show  those  lines  of  contact 
and  thereby  to  explain  the  great  explorations  that 
come  after. 

After  reading  the  assignment  in  the  text,  in 
dicate  on  the  outline  map  the  chief  localities  in 
which  the  commodities  of  the  Eastern  trade  were 
produced,  denoting  each  commodity  by  an  initial 
explained  in  an  accompanying  key  sheet.  Trace 
the  route  of  Marco  Polo's  journey,  begun  in  1271 
at  Ormuz  (Map  1)  and  leading  through  Balkh, 
then  the  famous  center  of  the  Zoroastrian  religion, 
to  the  oasis  of  Yarkand,  whose  horses  were  in  great 
demand,  and  thence,  through  the  passes  and  around 
the  deserts,  over  the  long  way  to  Cambaluc 
(Peking).  Show  his  return  through  Quinsay  (now 
known  as  Hangchow-Fu),  which,  impressed  with 
its  twelve  thousand  bridges  and  three  thousand 
baths,  he  described  as  the  finest  and  noblest  city 
in  the  world;  then  overland  to  Zayton  (the  mod 
ern  Tsuan-chau),  whose  glossy  silk,  by  a  corrup 
tion  of  the  city's  name,  was  known  to  Western 
trade  as  "satin."  Then,  sailing  near  the  coasts  of 


111 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


four  leading  Italian  commercial  towns,  and,  with 
the  help  of  a  map  of  Europe,  the  route  from  Venice 
via  Augsburg  and  Nuremburg  to  Hamburg  and 
Antwerp,  and  from  Genoa  along  the  Riviera  to 
the  Rhone  and  up  to  Paris.  The  annual  Venetian 
fleet  should  be  traced  to  Lisbon,  the  Seine,  London, 
the  Netherlands,  and  the  Hansa  towns  in  northern 
Germany. 

The  student  will  notice  the  advantageous  posi 
tion  of  the  Italian  cities,  as  the  trading  centers  for 
Europe.  They  had  their  agencies  or  fondachi  in 
most  towns  of  the  Levant.  Venice,  in  1400,  had 
virtual  control  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  Acre,  Crete,  Saloniki, 
the  ports  of  Thessaly,  seven  towns  on  the  Morean 
peninsula,  Corfu,  the  Cyclades,  and  the  Sporades. 
Genoa  was  her  greatest  rival  and  at  one  time  drove 
her  from  the  Black  Sea,  where  Genoese  influence 
was  very  powerful  in  towns  like  Trebizond  and 
Kaffa  (now  Theodosia).  Provengal  and  Spanish 
cities  were  also  represented  in  the  bazaars  of  the 
Levant.  Locate  seven  towns  in  this  region  which 
were  important  about  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth 
century. 

An  explanation  frequently  advanced  for  the 
decline  of  the  older  trading  towns  of  southern 


Europe  after  the  Commercial  Revolution  is  that 
their  commerce  with  the  Orient  was  strangled  by 
the  Turkish  occupation  of  the  old  trade  routes. 
Indicate  (from  Map  2)  the  dates  at  which  the  old 
Levantine  markets  fell  into  the  hands  of  Ottoman 
Turks  and  compare  with  the  dates  of  the  voyages 
of  the  Portuguese  navigators  and  Columbus.  Did 
the  Turkish  conquests  of  themselves  cause  the  Com 
mercial  Revolution?  Do  you  think  that  they 
accelerated  it?  What  part  do  you  think  the  factors 
of  time  and  expense  involved  in  the  old  routes 
had  in  urging  it  forward? 

The  Way  to  Heaven. — Since  differences  in  religion 
played  so  important  a  part  in  driving  people  to 
the  New  World,  indicate  on  your  outline,  with  the 
help  of  the  map  in  Hayes,  Vol.  I,  page  164,  the 
Catholic  and  the  Protestant  countries  to  Europe 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century.  It 
might  be  observed  that  at  the  time  America  was 
discovered  the  center  of  commercial  and  political 
affairs  was  shifting  from  the  Mediterranean  towns 
to  the  Atlantic  coast,  where  the  new  national 
states,  England,  France,  Spain,  and  Portugal,  were 
growing  more  and  more  important. 


MAP    STUDY    No.  2 
THE  DISCOVERY  OF  AMERICA:    A  STRAITLESS  BARRIER 

TEXT:   Bassett,  pp.  25-36;   Cheyney,  European  Background,  chaps,  iv-v;   Bourne,  Spain  in  America, 

chaps,  i-ix. 
MAP:  The  World. 


IT  is  the  purpose  of  this  map  study  to  illus 
trate  that  mighty  expansive  movement  which, 
by  hazarding  the  terrors  of  uncharted  seas, 
broadened  European  history  into  world  history 
and  brought  into  the  view  of  Christendom  two 
enormous  continents  full  of  wealth  and  wonders. 
There  is  no  better  way  to  realize  the  significance 
of  this  Commercial  Revolution  than  by  comparing 
the  world  that  Europe  knew  when  Columbus  was 
born  with  that  we  know  to-day.  After  heading 


the  assignment  in  the  text,  draw  a  red  boundary 
line  to  indicate  the  known  world  of  the  middle  of 
the  fifteenth  century. 

A.  The  Portuguese.  Why  should  Portugal  rather 
than  Spain  have  undertaken,  early  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  the  task  of  discovering  a  new  trade  route 
to  the  East  by  sailing  south  around  Africa  ?  Trained 
and  inspired  in  the  famous  college  of  mathematics 
at  Cape  Sagres  under  Prince  Henry  the  Navigator, 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


Portuguese  captains  found  and  charted  the  suc 
cessive  promontories  of  the  western  coast  of  the 
"  Dark  Continent."  To  mark  their  slow,  laborious 
progress,  indicate,  with  dates,  the  Canary  Islands, 
Cape  Bojador,  Cape  Verde,  Sierra  Leone,  the 
Congo  River,  and  Cape  Padrana.  Trace,  indi 
cating  date,  the  royal  expedition  under  Barthol 
omew  Diaz  along  the  coast  to  Algoa  Bay  and, 
on  the  return,  past  the  Cape  of  Storms  and  Tor 
ments,  later  called  Good  Hope;  that  under  Vasco 
da  Gama  directly  from  the  Cape  Verde  Islands 
around  this  cape  to  Natal  Bay,  the  mouth  of  the 
Zambesi,  Mozambique,  and  thence  to  Melinde, 
about  a  thousand  miles  farther  up  the  coast,  where 
he  fell  in  with  merchants  from  India,  whose  pilot 
guided  him  to  Calicut.  Here  at  Melinde,  in  1498, 
Europe  and  the  Orient  met  by  sea.  The  Portu 
guese,  despite  the  opposition  of  Mohammedan 
traders,  set  up  trading  stations  along  the  coasts 
of  the  Indian  Ocean.  By  1509  they  had  reached 
Malacca;  by  1525,  the  Spice  Islands;  and  by  1542, 
Cipangu,  or  Japan.  Pedro  Alvarez  Cabral  in  the 
spring  of  1500,  leading  out  from  the  Cape  Verde 
Islands  another  expedition  for  the  Portuguese 
crown,  tried  to  follow  da  Gama's  route;  but, 
venturing  too  far  west,  he  was  blown  along  the 
Brazilian  coast  to  a  point  which  may  be  located 
at  about  39°  west  longitude  by  16°  south  latitude 
and,  before  striking  out  for  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
f ormiJly  took  possession  of  the  land  for  his  sovereign. 
Show  also  the  coast  charted  by  Gaspar  Cortereal. 

In  using  Mercator's  Projection,  the  most  com 
mon  world  map,  it  is  well  to  remember  that  while 
the  relative  positions  of  the  earth's  features  are 
here  correctly  indicated,  the  areas  are  necessarily 
distorted  and  appear  all  out  of  proportion.  In 
fact,  the  geographer  says,'  in  his  haste,  "all  maps 
are  liars";  a  globe  is  the  only  reliable  guide, 
though  in  our  study  its  employment  would  be  most 
inconvenient.  Greenland  is  not,  as  Mercator  pre 
sents  it,  larger  than  the  continent  of  South  America, 
but  rather  stands  in  ratio  of  about  one  to  ten. 
Contrary  to  our  first  impression,  Brazil  is  in  reality 
considerably  larger  than  the  United  States. 

B.  Columbus.  Meanwhile,  Columbus,  under  the 
patronage  of  Queen  Isabella,  was  setting  forth  in 


exactly  the  opposite  direction,  hoping  to  reach 
the  Indies  by  sailing  westward.  The  reason  why 
the  enterprise  did  not  seem  to  him  too  discouraging 
will  appear  when  the  student  has  drawn  an  oval 
about  an  inch  in  length  which  would  overlap  the 
western  part  of  Mexico  and  labeled  it  "Cipangu," 
for  about  here  it  was  thought  to  be,  as  indicated 
on  the  globe  furnished  by  Martin  Behaim  in  Nu- 
remburg  about  the  time  Columbus  sailed.  Show 
his  first  and  third  voyages,  and  with  a  heavy  line 
the  coast  he  explored  on  the  third  and  fourth, 
giving  dates  (as  is  required  in  all  indications  in  this 
map  study).  Beside  the  line  of  Columbus's  first 
outward  voyage  place  an  arrow  pointing  toward 
the  southwest,  representing  the  trade  winds,  and 
beside  that  of  his  return  place  an  arrow  pointing 
toward  Spain  to  show  the  prevailing  westerlies. 
A  record  is  now  made  of  the  good  fortune  of  the 
discoverer.  In  those  days  of  crude  instruments 
of  navigation,  it  was  the  custom  to  find  the 
parallel  of  latitude  of  the  destination  and  then 
sail  as  nearly  as  possible  along  that  line.  So 
Columbus  sailed  to  the  Canaries  to  take  up  his 
course  at  about  the  twenty-seventh  parallel,  on 
which,  through  an  error  of  Toscanelli  and  other 
cartographers,  was  supposed  to  lie  the  northern 
point  of  Cipangu,  the  outpost  of  the  Orient.  The 
trade  winds  hi  this  latitude  so  favored  him  that 
he  dared  not  share  with  his  men  the  knowledge 
of  his  fearful  progress,  and  made  a  practice  of  re 
porting  each  day  less  than  the  actual  distance 
sailed.  The  vagary  midway  is  thus  explained  in 
his  journal:  "He  sailed  this  day  toward  the  West 
a  quarter  northwest  .  .  .  because  of  the  veering 
winds  and  calm  that  prevailed."  He  was  glad  to 
experience  a  west  wind  on  the  22d  of  September, 
that  he  might  convince  his  crew  that  a  homeward 
voyage  would  not  be  impossible.  Following  the 
general  custom,  on  the  return  he  sought  the  parallel 
of  southern  Spain,  on  which,  by  more  good  for 
tune,  he  fell  in  with  the  westerlies,  and  then  made 
a  swift  and  easy  journey.  Later,  when  these 
phenomena  were  widely  known,  Uieir  importance 
was  so  well  recognized  that  many  voyages,  even 
from  England,  to  the  continental  colonies  were 
made  by  way  of  the  West  Indies. 

Indicate  the  coast  explored  in  1499  by  Hojeda 


113 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


with  Amerigo  Vespucci  on  board.  Of  course,  it 
was  realized  that  even  though  Columbus 's  first 
landfall  might  be  within  the  Indies,  a  land  so  large 
as  to  contain  the  Orinoco  River  must  be  a  "new 
world,"  as  there  was  no  such  area  so  far  south  in 
the  known  East.  Waldseemiiller's  geography  of 
1507  placed  the  word  "America"  at  about  the 
latitude  of  modern  Paraguay.  The  names  "  North ' ' 
and  "South  America"  were  not  in  general  use 
until  after  1600.  Using  the  map  of  the  world 
drawn  by  Johan  Schoner  in  1523  (Map  4a),  trace 
the  voyage  of  Magellan's  ship  completed  the  year 
before,  and  draw  the  line  of  demarcation  as  cor 
rected  from  the  line  of  Pope  Alexander  VI  (1493) 
by  the  Treaty  of  Tordesillas  between  Spain  and 
Portugal  in  1494,  the  "Linea  divisionis  Castel- 
lanoru  e  Portugalleii "  (see  also  Map  3).  To  which 
part  of  the  earth  was  the  line  intended  to  apply? 
This  line  with  Cabral's  discovery  helps  to  explain 
why  Portuguese  is  to-day  the  language  of  Brazil. 
It  also  accounts  for  the  absence  of  the  Spanish 
in  the  development  of  the  route  around  Africa. 
What  also  deterred  Spain?  Why  and  how  was 
Portugal  largely  superseded  in  the  East  Indies? 

C.  The  English.  The  northern  national  states, 
too,  were  to  share  in  this  activity.  Inasmuch  as 
routes  were  considered  as  a  species  of  property 
and  thought  to  carry  with  them  a  sort  of  juris 
diction  and  monopoly,  it  was  to  be  expected  that 
the  merchants  of  France,  England,  and  the  United 
Netherlands  would  desire  to  find  ways  of  their  own 
to  the  Indies,  and  that  the  northern  sovereigns 
would  desire  to  rival  Their  Majesties  of  Spain  and 
Portugal  in  the  glory  of  overseas  dominion.  The 
epoch-making  exploration  of  the  Cabots,  dis 
patched  by  Bristol  merchants  with  the  favor  of 
Henry  VII,  should  be  indicated,  and  also  Frobisher 
Bay  and  Davis  Strait,  reached,  respectively,  in  1576 
and  1585  by  Sir  Martin  Frobisher  and  Capt.  John 
Davis,  both  searching  for  a  northwest  passage  to 
Cathay.  These  may  be  found  on  any  modern  map 
of  North  America.  In  this  quest  Englishmen  made 
several  other  notable  attempts.  In  1610  and  1611 
Henry  Hudson  skirted  the  southeast  coast  of  Green 
land  and  then  sailed  across  through  Hudson  Strait 
and  Hudson  Bay  to  James  Bay,  where  he  met  his 


death;  in  1616  William  Baffin,  in  his  little  ship 
the  Discovery,  penetrated  to  a  point  77°  45'  in  the 
great  bay  that  bears  his  name,  thereby  establish 
ing  a  "farthest  north"  in  those  seas  unsurpassed 
till  1852.  His  report  discouraged  further  attempts 
in  that  direction. 

Not  finding  a  route  or  riches  for  themselves,  the 
English  sailors  preyed  upon  the  Spaniards,  the 
two  nations  being  most  of  the  time  in  a  state  of 
quasi-war.  The  first  circumnavigation  by  the 
English  was  made  by  one  of  those  privateers,  Sir 
Francis  Drake.  He  had  twice  harried  the  coasts 
of  the  Spanish  Main — that  is,  roughly  speaking,  the 
American  land  and  waters  within  the  tropics,  and 
from  the  top  of  a  tree  on  the  Isthmus  of  Panama 
had,  in  1572,  surveyed  the  Pacific.  Arriving  home, 
he  fitted  out  an  expedition  of  five  ships  and  166 
men  and  set  out  to  explore  this  great  ocean  and 
incidentally  enrich  himself  by  plunder  on  the  way. 
His  route  may  be  traced  by  way  of  the  Moroccan 
coast,  the  Cape  Verde  Islands,  the  coast  of  Brazil 
to  the  Rio  de  la  Plata,  the  Straits  of  Magellan, 
Mocha  Island  (off  Chile),  Panama,  and  then  along 
the  American  coast  to  38°  north  latitude,  where  he 
landed,  and  in  the  name  of  the  queen  called  the 
country  Nova  Albion.  He  was  disappointed  that 
he  had  found  no  strait  through  to  the  Caribbean 
Sea.  He  now  bore  away  for  fourteen  weeks  to  the 
Moluccas,  where  cloves  and  other  spices  were  re 
ceived  as  gifts,  and,  having  touched  at  Java,  he 
started  for  home.  About  twelve  weeks  later  he 
doubled  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  set  sail  to  the 
north,  stopping  for  provisions  at  Sierra  Leone 
(Map  4b),  and  arrived  in  England,  September  26, 
1580,  after  nearly  three  years'  absence,  "very 
richly  fraught  with  gold,  silver,  silk,  pearls,  and 
precious  stones." 

D.  France.  Francis  I  of  France,  impressed  with 
the  fortune  of  his  rival,  Charles  V,  the  king  of 
Spain,  set  out  also  to  gain  new  routes  and  a  com 
mercial  empire.  Giovanni  da  Verrazano,  a  Flor 
entine  in  his  employ,  in  1524  was  the  first  to  strike 
straight  across  to  what  is  now  the  United  States, 
avoiding  the  Spanish  Main  to  the  south  and  the 
ice-strewn  seas  to  the  north.  Though  ill-recorded, 
his  route  may  be  traced  with  fair  assurance  from 


114 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


France  to  Cape  Fear  (Map  7b),  south  to  the  site 
of  Savannah  (Map  lib),  thence  north  to  New  York 
harbor  and,  exploring  the  New  England  coast 
from  Rhode  Island  to  Maine,  home  to  Europe. 
There  is  certainly  no  doubt  as  to  the  two  voyages 
of  Jacques  Cartier,  ten  years  later,  which  may  be 
shown  as  from  France  to  the  coast  of  Newfoundland, 
already  known  to  fishermen,  through  the  Straits  of 
Belle  Isle  to  Gaspe  Bay  and  the  island  of  Anticosti 
and  home;  and,  in  1535,  up  the  St.  Lawrence  to  the 
Indian  town  of  Hochclega  (Montreal).  That  the  hope 
of  reaching  China  long  survived  Cartier  is  recorded  in 
the  name  La  Chine  derisively  bestowed  much  later  on 
the  near-by  rapids.  He  made  two  more  voyages  to 
this  region,  but,  though  a  settlement  was  attempted, 
bitter  religious  wars  at  home  postponed  further  ven 
tures  by  the  French  until  the  time  of  Henry  IV. 

E.  The  Northeast  Passage  and  the  Dutch.  But 
the  northwest  passage  was  not  the  only  short  way 
to  the  Orient  that  Europeans  of  the  sixteenth 
century  believed  might  be  discovered.  In  1553 
Sebastian  Cabot  and  others  promoted  a  voyage  to 
search  for  a  water  route  to  the  Indies  beyond  North 
Cape.  In  that  year  Sir  Hugh  Willoughby  and 
Robert  Chancellor  set  out  to  seek  this  northeast 
passage,  and  the  latter,  having  succeeded  in  reach 
ing  the  site  of  Archangel,  penetrated  overland,  along 
a  route  familiar  to  the  Norwegians,  to  Moscow, 
thereby  establishing,  for  the  first  time,  trade  rela 
tions  between  Russia  and  the  west.  As  the  student 
indicates  this  route  he  may  mark  the  region  as 


the  sphere  of  the  famous  Muscovy  Company.  The 
directors  of  this  corporation,  still  desirous  of  the 
passage,  sent  Henry  Hudson  on  two  voyages  of 
Arctic  exploration,  in  1607  and  1608,  the  second 
especially  to  find  a  good  sea  route  to  Spitzbergen 
and  Nova  Zembla.  His  failure  brought  an  end  to 
such  investigations  by  the  company,  but  the  Dutch, 
who  for  nearly  twenty  years  had  been  exploring 
these  frozen  seas  with  a  similar  purpose,  now  en 
gaged  this  navigator  to  carry  forward  the  search 
in  their  behalf.  In  the  employ  of  the  Dutch  East 
India  Company  he  set  out  in  1609.  Disheartened 
at  the  prospect  of  a  voyage  in  that  fearful  climate, 
his  crew  of  eighteen  or  twenty  men  mutinied  be 
fore  they  reached  North  Cape  and  forced  him  to 
abandon  his  plan,  though  they  accepted  his  new 
proposition  to  seek  a  northwest  passage  along  the 
American  coast  at  about  the  40th  parallel  of  lati 
tude.  "This  idea,"  states  a  contemporary  writer, 
"had  been  suggested  to  Hudson  by  some  letters 
and  maps  which  his  friend  Captain  Smith  had 
sent  him  from  Virginia.  The  route  of  the  Half  Moon 
may  thus  be  traced  from  the  Texel,  an  island  off 
the  Netherlands,  to  Newfoundland,  Penobscot 
Bay,  Cape  Cod,  Delaware  Bay  (which  he  later 
called  the  "South  River"),  and,  on  September  4th, 
at  the  mouth  of  the  "Great  North  River  of  New 
Netherland,"  later  to  bear  his  name.  During  the 
next  month  he  explored  this  stream  and,  disap 
pointed  at  finding  no  passage,  sailed  for  home,  to 
tell  of  this  new  region  apparently  of  good  fertility 
and  rich  in  furs. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  3 
THE  LAND:    "MY  COUNTRY,  'TIS  OF  THEE 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  1-11;  Farrand,  Basis  of  American  History. 
MAP:    The  United  States. 


map  study  concerns  itself  with  the  in 
terior  of  the  great  continent  the  exploration 
of  whose  coasts  we  have  traced.  It  was,  indeed, 
a  magnificent  home-land  that  was  revealed  to 
western  civilization  by  these  soldiers,  missionaries, 


and  fur  traders  who  in  early  modern  times  cut 
their  way  through  the  wilderness  or  paddled  their 
canoes  along  the  almost  endless  waterways  of 
North  America.  The  migrations  and  settlements  of 
Europeans  on  this  soil  cannot  be  intelligently  fol- 


115 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


lowed,  it  is  clear,  without  first  spying  out  the  land 
to  note  its  chief  outstanding  features.  Its  size 
impresses  us  at  once;  applying  the  scale  of  your 
map,  it  is  observed  that  some  three  thousand 
miles  stretch  between  Cape  Cod  and  Cape  Men- 
docino  and  more  than  half  as  many  from  the  Lake 
of  the  Woods  to  the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande. 
Europe  west  of  Russia  could  be  included  almost 
twice  within  the  great  rectangle  of  the  United 
States. 

Its  diversity  is  as  impressive  as  its  size.  The 
land  divides  itself  into  six  grand  geographic  prov 
inces.  They  are  the  Coastal  Plains,  the  Appalachian 
Highland,  the  Central  Lowland  Plains  or  Prairie, 
the  Northwestern  Peneplain,  the  High  Plains  of 
the  Southwest,  and  the  Cordilleras.  Let  us  indicate 
them  in  this  order,  for  so  they  were  reached  by 
the  Anglo-Saxon  settlers,  though  explorers  had 
come  last  upon  the  northwestern  plains. 

Starting  at  a  point  about  three  hundred  miles 
up  the  Rio  Grande,  draw  an  arc,  swinging  toward 
the  east,  to  a  point  on  the  Red  River  (Map  34) 
about  four  hundred  miles  from  its  mouth,  and  then 
a  similar  curve  to  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio.  There 
the  line  goes  almost  straight  to  a  point  about  two 
hundred  miles  north  of  Mobile  Bay.  This  has 
defined  the  Gulf  Coastal  Plain.  Continue,  curving 
round  the  hills,  nonneastward  to  New  York  harbor. 
Between  this  line  and  the  sea,  adding  in  Long 
Island,  lies  most  of  the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain, 
for  the  margin  in  New  England  is  very  narrow. 

Prof.  Ellsworth  Huntington,  in  his  Red  Man's 
Continent,1  gives  a  clear  description  of  the  Appa 
lachian  Highland.  Of  the  three  bands,  the  crys 
talline  is  chiefly  developed  in  New  England,  of 
which  it  occupies  almost  the  whole.  Where  pene 
trated  by  the  Hudson  it  is  but  a  few  miles  wide 
and,  smoothed  to  easy  hills,  includes  Manhattan 
Island;  it  then  crosses  southward  to  a  point  beyond 
the  Potomac,  where  it  divides  into  the  Piedmont 
or  foothill  region,  about  a  hundred  miles  wide  in 
Virginia,  and  back  of  this  the  Blue  Ridge,  which 
finally  itself  becomes  a  high  plateau  cut  into  many 
peaks  and  stretching  toward  the  west.  The  second 
band,  the  Appalachian  valley  system,  begins  at 
Lake  Champlain  and,  following  down  the  Hudson 

1  New  Haven,  1919,  pp.  59-68. 


to  beyond  the  Catskills,  it  sweeps  through  to 
Pennsylvania,  where  it  rises  and  is  striped  by  ir 
regular  ridges.  From  the  southwestern  counties 
of  this  state  it  rises  gradually  as  it  stretches  out 
behind  the  Blue  Ridge,  until  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  Carolina's  it  reaches  the  high  level  of  the 
eroded  crystalline  table-land.  The  third  band,  the 
"Alleghany  front,"  runs  through  western  Penn 
sylvania,  West  Virginia  and  eastern  Kentucky  as 
the  Alleghanies;  it  rises  higher  in  Tennessee,  where, 
changing  its  name  to  Cumberland,  it  is  cut  into 
deep,  short  isolated  valleys,  where  live  the  "poor 
whites,"  famous  in  the  missionary  monthlies,  the 
moving  pictures,  and  internal-revenue  reports. 

After  the  student  has  indicated  these  three 
several  parts  of  the  great  Appalachian  highland 
which  extends  along  a  line  not  far  south  of 
Lake  Erie  over  most  of  Ohio,  he  may  define  the 
Central  Lowland  Plain  or  Prairie,  roughly  as  the 
region  inclosed  by  the  Alleghany  Plateau,  the 
Great  Lakes,  the  lower  Ohio,  and  the  last  seven 
hundred  miles  of  the  Missouri,  with  bays  running 
northwest  into  Canada,  east  into  New  York,  and 
southwest  to  the  Ked.  The  Ozark  Plateau  stands 
between  the  last-named  section  and  the  Mississippi. 
"There  is  some  justification  for  those  who  say 
that  the  north  central  portion  of  the  United  States 
is  more  fortunate  than  any  other  part  of  the  earth. 
Nowhere  else,  unless  in  western  Europe,  is  there 
such  a  combination  of  fertile  soil,  fine  climate, 
'easy  communication,  and  possibilities  for  manu 
facturing  and  commerce."  The  Northwestern 
Peneplain  may  be  shown  as  extending  northward 
from  about  the  southern  boundary  of  Nebraska, 
a  region  long  unsettled,  but  despite  its  dryness 
now  a  field  renowned  for  wheat  and  cattle.  The 
High  Plains  toward  the  south  are  made  of  silt 
and  gravel  washed  down  from  the  Rockies,  and 
here  the  horned  cattle  herded  by  the  ranchmen 
have  succeeded  the  buffalo.  To  the  west  is,  of 
course,  the  great  Cordillera  range,  with  its  ridges 
of  the  Rockies  and  the  Cascade-Sierra  Nevada, 
holding  between  them  the  Columbia  Plateau  and 
the  dry  Great  Basin  (Map  36).  This  great  moun 
tain  system,  fascinating  to  the  geographer,  did  not 
come  into  our  history  until  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  when  its  conquest  for  pur- 


116 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


poses  of  commerce  was  more  easily  effected  by 
the  railroad. 

Certainly  the  varying  climates  of  the  earth  ex 
ercise  a  profound  influence  on  the  development 
of  men  and  nations.  A  school  of  climatologists 
has  arisen  who  believe  this  influence  almost,  if  not 
quite,  determining.  It  is  said  that  the  white  race 
is  physically  at  its  best  when  the  average  tempera 
ture  ranges  from  50°  to  73°  F.1  Since  investigation 
shows  that  the  best  mental  work  is  done  where  the 
average  outside  temperature  is  about  40°,  to  get 
conditions  best  for  mind  and  body  it  would  be 
well,  perhaps,  to  bring  the  figures  down  to  45° 
and  65°,  respectively.  Relying  upon  the  United 
States  Weather  Bureau  maps,  let  us  plot  these 
isotherms.  That  of  45°  begins  at  the  southern 
corner  of  Maine  and  runs  almost  due  west  to 
Wyoming,  thence  south  to  the  boundary  of  New 
Mexico,  and  then  northwest  to  the  northern  line 
of  Idaho.  That  of  65°  begins  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Santee  River  (Map  24)  and,  curving  gently  into 
the  south,  reaches  the  northwest  corner  of  Louisi 
ana,  and  then,  deflecting  slightly  to  the  northwest, 
runs  through  Presidio  on  the  Rio  Grande  (near 
30°  north  latitude;  Map  50a), across  to  New  Mexico 
near  its  southwestern  corner,  then  northwesterly 
nearly  to  Fresno,  California  (near  Lake  Tulare; 
frontispiece),  and  then,  doubling  south,  it  parallels 
the  coast  into  Lower  California.  Comparison  with 
a  rainfall  map  would  suggest  deletion  of  the  Rockies, 
southwestern  California,  southern  Arizona,  and  the 
regions  of  the  "high  plains "  north  and  south.  After 
this  correction  there  is  a  striking  correspondence 
with  the  area  of  the  highest  civilization  in  America, 
as  judged  by  many  authorities,2  the  greatest  devel 
opment  being  in  the  well-watered  region  of  the 
northeast  and  the  basin  of  the  Great  Lakes. 


1 E.  Huntington,  Red  Man's  Continent,  chap,  i;  and  Civilisa 
tion  and  Climate  (New  Haven,  1915),  chap.  i. 

2  Huntington,  Civilization  and  Climate,  pp.  172-182.  The 
interested  student  should  consult  Supan's  map  of  climatic 
provinces,  conveniently  found  reproduced  in  R.  De  C.  Ward's 
Climate  (New  York,  1908),  p.  56.  The  whole  subject  of  en 
vironmental  control  of  individual  and  social  development  may 
be  studied  conveniently  by  the  aid  of  A.  H.  Koller,  The  Theory 
of  Environment  (Menasha,  Wisconsin,  1918),  a  handbook 
more  of  bibliographical  suggestion  than  orderly  exposition, 
and  Jean  Brunhes,  Human  Geography  (New  York,  1920).  The 
student  should  be  on  his  guard,  however,  with  respect  to  gen 
eralizations  advanced  by  anthropogeographers,  remembering  that 
many  of  the  results  of  this  science  are  as  yet  conjectural. 


The  distribution  of  the  glacial  drifts  has  so 
affected  the  fertility  of  the  soil  in  our  country, 
and  thus  the  quality  of  civilization,  that  this  sub 
ject  is  also  worth  at  least  a  moment's  investigation. 
The  line  marking  the  extent  of  the  greatest  glacial 
area  may  be  indicated  thus:  virtually  all  New 
England  being  included,  it  may  start  from  New 
York  harbor  and  proceed  to  Lake  Chautauqua 
(Map  13);  then,  deflecting  slightly  to  the  south 
east  around  to  Warren,  Ohio  (Map  34);  due  west 
to  Columbus  and,  deeply  curving,  first  toward  the 
south,  to  Cincinnati;  following  the  Ohio  nearly 
to  Louisville;  abruptly  north  to  a  point  not  far 
west  of  Indianapolis;  doubling  back  to  the  mouth 
of  the  Wabash,  and  then  across  to  Chester  on  the 
Mississippi  (Map  41b),  up  which  stream  to  the 
Missouri  and  then  due  west  to  the  Kansas  boundary, 
from  which  the  line  runs  parallel  with  the  Missouri 
River,  at  a  distance  of  about  a  hundred  miles,  to 
its  source,  and  thence  to  the  mountains.  Because 
the  glacier  converged  in  two  streams,  there  is  a 
driftless  area  comprising  the  southeast  quarter  of 
Wisconsin,  where  they  had  not  yet  united.1  The 
mechancially  ground  rock  thus  deposited  has 
greatly  increased  the  productivity  of  the  soil.  In 
Wisconsin  it  was  found  in  1910  that  the  average 
value  of  farm  land  in  six  counties  partially  covered 
with  drift  was  $56.90  per  acre,  while  that  of  thir 
teen  driftless  counties,  otherwise  quite  similar, 
was  $33.30  per  acre.2  But  tillage  of  the  glaciated 
soil,  especially  in  the  east,  has  required  more  labor. 
Professor  Shaler  has  estimated  that  a  month's 
toil  is  needed  to  put  such  an  acre  in  a  state  of 
cultivation. 

"Next  to  the  quality  of  the  soil,"  wrote  this 
physiographer,  in  his  famous  chapter  in  Justin 
Winsor's  History,3  "the  forest  covering  of  a  country 

1  For  details,  see  G.  Frederick  Wright,  The  Ice  Age  in  North 
America  (5th  ed.,  Oberlin,  1911),  pp.  202  et  seq. 

2R.  H.  Whitbeck,  "Economic  Aspects  of  Glaciation  in  Wis 
consin,"  in  Annals  of  Hie  Association  of  American  Geographers, 
vol.  iii;  cited  by  Huntington,  Red  Man's  Continent,  pp.  56-59. 
Similar  observations  have  been  made  elsewhere — for  example, 
in  Ohio  and  Indiana. 

8  Nathaniel  Southgate  Shaler  deserves  a  word  in  such  a  worfc 
as  this.  He  was  a  professor  of  paleontology  and  geology  in  Har 
vard  from  1868  to  1906,  and  by  his  voluminous  writing  and  his 
inspiring  teaching  did  much  to  stimulate  interest  in  the  influence 
of  geography  on  history  in  America.  Justin  Winsor,  libra 
rian  of  Harvard  from  1877  to  1897,  was  the  foremost  authority 
on  early  American  history.  His  greatest  contribution  was  an 


117 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


does  the  most  to  determine  its  uses  to  man. 
Although  the  Western  prairies  have  the  temporary 
advantage  in  that  they  are  more  readily  brought 
under  cultivation  than  wooded  regions,  the  forests 
of  a  land  contribute  so  largely  to  man's  well-being 
that  without  them  he  can  hardly  maintain  the 
structure  of  his  civilization.  The  distribution  of 
American  forests  is  peculiar.  All  the  Appalachian 
mountain  system  and  the  shore  region  between 
that  system  and  the  sea,  as  well  as  the  Gulf  bor 
der  as  far  west  as  the  Mississippi,  were  originally 
covered  by  the  finest  forest  that  has  existed  in 
the  historical  period,  outside  of  the  tropics.  In 
the  highlands  south  of  Pennsylvania  and  in  the 
western  table-land  north  to  the  Great  Lakes,  this 
forest  was  generally  of  hardwood  or  deciduous 
trees;  on  the  shore  land  and  north  of  Pennsylvania 
in  the  highlands,  the  pines  and  other  conifers  held 
a  larger  share  of  the  surface.  The  parts  of  the 
land  bordering  on  the  Mississippi  on  the  west, 
as  far  as  the  central  regions  of  Louisiana,  Arkansas, 
and  Missouri,  are  forest  clad,  Michigan  and  portions 
of  Wisconsin  and  Minnesota  have  broad  areas  of 
forest,  but  the  cis-Mississippian  states  of  Indiana 
and  Illinois,  and  the  trans-Mississippian  country 
west  to  the  Sierra  Nevada,  is  only  wooded,  and 
that  generally  scantily,  along  the  borders  of  the 
streams.  Data  for  precise  statements  are  yet 
wanting,  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  this  area  is 
untimbered  over  about  seven-eighths  of  its  surface, 
and  the  wood  which  exists  has  relatively  small 

eight- volume  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  the  United  States, 
which  he  partially  wrote  and  edited  throughout  with  exhaustive 
bibliographies,  and  which  every  serious  student  of  this  subject 
must  examine.  Those  who  find  an  interest  in  historical  geog 
raphy  will  appreciate  the  value  of  the  many  contemporary 
maps  published  in  this  work. 


value  for  constructive  purposes.  North  of  the 
regions  described,  except  along  the  Pacific  coast, 
where  fine  softwood  forests  extend  from  near 
San  Francisco  to  Alaska,  the  forest  growth  rapidly 
diminishes  in  size,  and  therefore  in  value,  from  the 
forest  resources  it  affords."  The  great  cone-bearing 
forest  of  the  lake  states,  running  northward  from 
the  central  part  of  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  and  Min 
nesota,  extends  not  quite  to  the  western  boundary 
of  the  last-named  state.1  It  is  scarcely  necessary 
to  remark  that  this  great  mantle  of  forest  directly 
affected  the  progress  of  the  white  man  in  America. 
It  is  estimated  that  on  the  average  about  a  month 
of  unremitting  labor  is  required  to  clear  an  acre.2 
Allowing  for  all  the  natural  clearings,  the  student 
may  yet  realize  some  of  the  expense  involved  in 
the  conquest  of  this  continent.  To  make  this 
clear  shade  with  close  light  parallel  lines,  prefer 
ably  with  a  green  pencil,  the  area  described.  Black 
dots  should  be  used  to  indicate  the  regions  of  the 
evergreen. 

The  European  immigrants  had  more  to  meet 
than  forests,  desert  wastes,  and  roving  beasts; 
north  of  Mexico  there  were  a  half  million  human 
beings,  the  Indians,  now  classified  into  fifty-nine 
linguistic  families.  By  referring  to  Map  6  we 
can  indicate  the  position  of  some  of  these  which 
affect  our  early  history — the  Athapascan,  Sho- 
shonean,Caddoan,  Siouan,  Muskhogean,  Iroquoian, 
and  Algonquian.  Each  of  these  divisions,  of  course, 
includes  a  number  of  tribes,  often  showing  great 
disparity  in  culture,  the  particular  location  of 
which  will  be  a  concern  of  later  studies. 

1  Cf.  I.  Bowman,  Forest  Physiography  (New  York,   1914), 
p.  124. 

2  Shaler  in  op.  cit,  vol.  iv.,  p.  xii. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  4 


THE  PATHFINDERS:   SPANIARDS  AND  FRENCHMEN  PENETRATE  THE 

WILDERNESS 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  37-39;  Bourne,  Spain  in  America,  chaps,  x-xiv;  R.  G.  Thwaites,  France  in  America, 
chaps,  i-iv. 

MAP:  The  United  States. 


THE  first  white  men  extensively  to  explore  the 
vast  exterior  of  America  were  Spaniards.  They 
had  found  the  land  something  more  than  an  irri 
tating  barrier  on  the  way  to  the  Indies.  Mines 
had  been  discovered  in  the  Cordilleras  which 
yielded  such  treasure  as  to  dazzle  the  world  and 
make  no  tale  of  wealth  or  wonders  seem  incredible. 
Ponce  de  Leon,  the  region  of  whose  exploration 
should  be  shown  (Map  5),  was  an  example  of  the 
romantic-mindedness  which  urged  on  much  of  this 
inquiry.  These  enterprises,  which,  one  by  one, 
may  now  be  traced,  were  doomed  to  disappoint 
ment  after  heavy  cost  of  human  life,  but  they  did 
drive  forward  daring  men  for  thousands  of  miles 
over  plain  and  mountain  and  through  dense  forest 
thicket,  revealing  to  the  world  the  character  of  the 
southern  part  of  what  is  now  the  United  States. 
They  had  not  the  happy  fortune  of  the  grim  con- 
quistadores  who  rifled  Mexico  and  Cuzco,  but  they 
are  honorably  remembered  in  historical  geography. 
Pamfilo  de  Narvaez,  in  1528,  determining  to  take 
possession  of  a  great  grant  on  the  Gulf,  landed  with 
six  hundred  men  near  Tampa  Bay  and  started 
into  the  interior;  his  numbers  were  terribly  re 
duced  by  starvation  and  disease,  his  ships  were 
lost,  and  finally  a  few  poor  craft  fabricated  on  the 
beach  brought  a  handful  of  survivors  to  the  Texan 
coast.  One  of  these  was  the  treasurer,  Cabega  de 
Vaca,  who  now  became  the  leader  of  the  castaways, 
and  after  five  years'  forced  sojourn,  during  which 
time  they  saved  their  heads  by  cleverly  practicing 
the  arts  of  medicine  men,  he  and  his  companions 
escaped  and  made  their  way  for  three  months 
across  the  Mexican  plains  and  highlands  to  the 
Aztec  capital.  His  account,  conveniently  avail- 


119 


able  in  J.  F.  Jameson's  Original  Narratives  of  Amer 
ican  History,  though  disfigured  by  patent  exagger 
ations,  was  written  with  spirit,  shows  keen  obser 
vation,  and  is  one  of  the  first  to  describe  the  social 
organization  of  the  natives.  It  was  this  narrative 
which  stirred  the  resolution  of  Hernando  de  Soto, 
who  had  served  under  Pizzaro  as  de  Narvaez  had 
under  Cortez.  With  his  six  hundred  and  twenty 
followers  he  set  forth  from  Tampa  Bay  on  the 
long  laborious  route  marked  out  on  our  map,  ever 
fortifying  the  spirit  of  his  dwindling  little  army 
by  his  own  indomitable  will.  Though  he  himself 
was  buried  in  the  Mississippi,  the  survivors  did 
not  immediately  halt  the  exploration;  but  they 
were,  in  July,  1543,  forced  to  turn  their  way  south 
toward  the  Spanish  settlements.  "Thus  ended 
the  most  remarkable  exploring  expedition  in  the 
history  of  North  America.  Its  only  parallel  is  the 
contemporary  enterprise  of  Coronado."1 

Acting  on  a  story  that  the  fabled  Seven  Cities  of 
Cibola  lay  to  the  north,  the  governor  of  Mexico 
sent  Friar  Marcos  to  investigate.  He  gained  a 
distant  view  of  the  Zufli  pueblos,  and  returned  for 
aid,  but  was  superseded  by  Francisco  de  Coronado. 
With  three  hundred  Spaniards  and  eight  hundred 
Indians  he  set  out  along  the  route  which  may  be 
drawn  after  study  of  the  map.  Disillusioned  as 
to  "Cibola,"  he  pressed  on  over  a  great  distance 
to  further  disappointment  in  the  meager  village  of 
Quivira,  which  had  been  described  to  him  with 
fantastic  embellishments.  Meantime  de  Soto's 
men  were  breaking  through  along  the  Arkansas, 
and  a  Shawnee  woman  who  had  run  away  from 
Coronado's  little  army  came  upon  these  other 
1 E.  G.  Bourne,  Spain  in  America,  p. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN   HISTORY 


Spaniards  nine  days  later,  so  near  to  meeting  had 
these  two  parties  unconsciously  approached.  In 
1542  Cabrillo  explored  the  coast  of  the  Pacific 
from  Lower  California  to  a  cape  he  called  Men- 
docino.  In  half  a  century  Spanish  enterprise  had 
penetrated  the  continent  almost  from  sea  to  sea; 
though  deeply  disappointed  at  the  apparent  lack 
of  mineral  wealth,  they  had  yet  revealed  a  land 
of  unsuspected  size  and  variety.  Four  centuries 
after  Columbus,  a  mighty  nation,  nourished  from 
these  hills  and  plains,  was  to  crush  the  Spanish 
power  almost  in  a  single  blow. 

Men  left  Spain  for  riches.  But  in  other  European 
countries  Christian  unity  had  been  shattered,  and 
minorities  who  dared  reject  state  creeds  were  so 
harassed  that  they  sought  a  refuge  even  in  the 
western  wilderness  beyond  the  sea.  The  first  were 
French  Calvinists,  the  Huguenots,  a  small  group 
of  whom  a  fitful  royal  favor  allowed  to  leave  and 
settle  at  Port  Royal  (Maps  5  and  6b)  in  1562. 
This  was  soon  abandoned,  and  two  years  later  the 
leader  of  their  sect,  Admiral  Coligny,  sent  another 
colony  to  the  mouth  of  the  St.  Johns  (Map  34), 
in  the  Florida  region.  Though  the  prospect  seemed 
prosperous  to  them,  the  new  settlement  around 
Fort  Caroline  was  stamped  out,  in  1565,  by 
Menendez,  a  Spanish  official  who  resented  this 
intrusion  by  Frenchmen  and  heretics,  and  who 
about  the  same  time  began  the  building  of  St. 
Augustine  (Map  5).  :  He  had  really  marked  the 
end  of  Protestant  colonization  under  the  French 
flag,  for  during  the  civil  wars  that  followed,  and 
afterward,  the  government  forbade  it. 

But  it  was  certainly  not  to  be  expected  that  the 
vigorous  Henry  IV  of  France,  when  internal  peace 
had  returned  to  that  country  in  1589,  would  sit 
by  contentedly  while  his  royal  "cousins"  of  Spain, 
and  possibly  England,  carved  out  the  New  World 
between  them.  A  few  attempts  at  settlements 
at  Tadoussac  (Map  13)  and  in  Acadia,  later  called 
Nova  Scotia,  were  hardly  successful,  but  Samuel 
de  Champlain,  in  1608,  supported  by  the  court  of 
France,  had  better  fortune  in  founding  a  town  on 
the  rock  of  Quebec.  Instead  of  playing  the  benefi 
cent  peacemaker  among  the  Indians,  however,  he 
joined  the  Hurons  and  Algonquins  against  the 
Iroquois  Confederacy,  and  in  May,  1609,  the  com 


bined  war  party  set  out,  starting  from  the  mouth 
of  the  Richelieu  and  working  their  way  to  the 
long  lake  that  was  soon  christened  with  the  name 
of  the  French  leader.  There  near  modern  Ticon- 
deroga  they  met  and  easily  defeated  the  Iroquois, 
stunned  and  terrorized  by  the  thundering  weapons 
of  the  white  men.  Thus  the  leader  from  Quebec 
gained  prestige  with  the  Algonquins,  but  planted  in 
the  hearts  of  the  Iroquois  an  undying  prejudice 
against  the  French.  Champlain  is  to  be  remem 
bered  as  an  explorer  as  well  as  the  captain  of  the 
little  colony.  He  was  fascinated  by  the  silent 
sublimities  of  the  forest,  moved  by  religious  zeal 
to  reach  as  many  Indians  as  possible,  anxious  to 
discover  the  long-sought  waterway  to  the  Pacific, 
and  resolutely  determined  to  mark  out  a  goodly 
province  for  his  royal  master.  These  and  the  de 
sire  to  develop  the  fur  trade  were  the  chief  motives 
of  the  French  exploration. 

In  1603,  before  Quebec  was  founded,  Champlain 
had  gone  some  forty  miles  up  the  Saguenay,  but 
his  longest  journey,  covering  about  fifteen  hundred 
miles,  was  that  taken  by  his  party  in  the  expedition 
against  the  Iroquois  in  1615.  Starting  from  Que 
bec,  they  went  up  the  St.  Lawrence  and  the  Ottawa 
and,  by  Mattawan  River  and  three  small  lakes, 
to  the  portage  to  Lake  Nipissing.  This  carry  is 
very  short;  geologists  have  shown  that  a  depression 
of  about  a  hundred  feet  at  this  point  would  turn 
the  "vaters  of  the  upper  lakes  into  the  Ottawa, 
shortening  the  route  for  navigation  270  miles. 
Champlain's  forces  made  their  way  over  the  lake, 
down  French  River  to  Georgian  Bay.  After 
paddling  along  the  eastern  shore  of  this  body  of 
water  they  struck  southeast  by  means  of  lakes 
and  creeks  and  carries  till,  on  reaching  the  Trent 
River,  they  floated  into  Lake  Ontario  in  the  Bay 
of  Quinte  behind  the  Prince  Edward  peninsula, 
easily  identified  on  the  map.  Skirting  along  the 
islands,  they  crossed  to  the  eastern  shore  and 
traveled  overland  to  an  Onondago  fort  just  south 
of  Oneida  Lake  (Map  11  a),  where  they  were  re 
pulsed  and  obliged  to  return  without  success.  Such 
was  a  typical  war  raid.  Champlain  frequently 
found  traces  of  traders  and  was  entertained  by 
Recollet  priests  working  among  the  Huron  Indians, 
though  this  was  scarcely  seven  years  after  Quebec 


120 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


was  founded.  "Long  before  the  ice-crusted  pines 
of  Plymouth  had  listened  to  the  rugged  psalmody 
of  the  Puritan,  the  solitudes  of  western  New 
York  and  the  stern  wilderness  of  Lake  Huron 
were  trodden  by  the  iron  heel  of  the  soldier  and  the 
sandaled  foot  of  the  Franciscan  friar."  * 

A  true  pathfinder  was  Jean  Nicolet,  whom 
Champlain  sent  into  the  West  in  1634,  a  century 
after  Cartier's  exploration  of  the  gateway  of  New 
France.  We  may  trace  his  route  from  Lake 
Nipissing  along  the  northern  shore  of  Georgian 
Bay  and  Lake  Huron  to  Sault  Ste.  Marie,  as  the 
rapids  of  the  river  leading  from  Lake  Superior  came 
to  be  called.  Keeping  close  to  the  land,  he  paddled 
to  and  through  the  Straits  of  Mackinac.  He  soon 
went  on  past  the  Chippewa  country  into  that  of 
the  Winnebagos,  with  whom  his  knowledge  of  the 
Algonquin  language  availed  him  little.  He  pushed 
forward  his  canoe  the  length  of  Green  Bay,  up  the 
Fox  and  across  Lake  Winnebago  into  the  Mas- 
coutin  country,  but  apparently  did  not  take  the 
portage  to  the  Wisconsin.  After  circling  into  the 
south  through  the  upper  Illinois  and  Potawatomi 
lands,  he  again  embarked  on  Green  Bay,  and  by 
July,  1635,  was  at  Three  Rivers.2 

Nicolet,  as  far  as  we  know,  had  not  seen  Lake 
Superior,  and  it  was  over  twenty  years  before  the 
Sieur  de  Groseilliers  wintered  with  the  Sioux  on 
its  shores.  He  returned  the  following  year,  1659, 
with  his  brother-in-law,  the  Sieur  de  Radisson, 
with  whom  he  explored  the  southern  and  western 
borders  of  the  lake.  About  a  dozen  years  later,  in 
1672,  Louis  Joliet,  who  had  previously  made  some 
investigation  for  the  provincial  government  as  to 
the  extent  of  the  Lake  Superior  copper  mines,  was 
selected  to  explore  the  region  of  the  great  river  of 
the  West,  of  which  the  Chippewas  and  Sioux  had 
eloquently  spoken  and  which  was  believed  to  flow 
into  the  Pacific.  At  Michillimackinac  Mission  he 
found  and  interested  Father  Jacques  Marquette, 

1  Francis   Parkman,   Pioneers  of  France  in   North   America 
(Boston,    25th    ed.,    1891),    p.     179.    The    Kecollets    were 
Franciscans. 

2  There  is  some  disagreement  as  to  the  date  and  extent  of 
Nicolet's  journey;  the  text  here  follows  Justin  Winsor's  C artier 
to  Frontenac  (Boston,  1894),  pp.  149-153,  which  account  is  very 
likely  correct.     See  also  Francis  Parkman,  The  Jesuits  in  North 
America,  p.  166;   William  Kingsford,  History  of  Canada,  vol.  i, 
pp.  213-214. 


121 


who  was  given  premission  to  accompany  him. 
The  following  day  the  trader  and  the  missionary, 
together  with  five  others,  started  over  the  same 
route  taken  by  Nicolet  nearly  forty  years  before, 
but,  unlike  him,  did  not  stop  at  the  headwaters  of 
the  Fox.  They  found  an  easy  portage  here  to  the 
Wisconsin,  only  two  miles  away;  indeed,  the  latter 
river,  being  five  feet  higher  than  the  Fox,  some 
times  in  flood  season  poured  its  waters  over  the 
shallow  divide  to  mingle  with  those  of  the  St. 
Lawrence  basin. 

On  July  17th  the  little  party  floated  into  the 
great  river  which  Joliet  called  La  Buade,  after 
Governor  Frontenac's  family,  and  which  Mar 
quette  piously  christened  the  Conception;  it  later 
became  generally  known  as  the  Colbert,  and  finally 
by  the  Indian  name,  the  Mississippi.  As  they 
paddled  downstream  for  a  full  month,  past  rocky 
bluffs  and  river  mouths,  green  isles  and  wooded 
banks,  from  the  region  of  the  fir  and  northern  oak 
to  that  of  the  holly  and  the  pecan  that  grow  about 
the  Arkansas,  they  rightly  divined  that  the  great 
river  emptied  not  into  the  Gulf  of  California,  but 
into  that  of  Mexico,  but  they  could  scarcely  realize 
the  vastness  of  the  basin  which  it  drained.  The 
St.  Lawrence  system,  with  the  lakes,  affords  some 
two  thousand  miles  of  navigable  water,  but  that 
of  the  Mississippi,  draining  a  basin  of  two  and  a 
half  million  square  miles  of  territory,  makes  this 
seem  small  indeed.  "With  forty  or  fifty  consider 
able  tributaries,  and  a  hundred  thousand  affluent 
streams  in  all,  the  great  current  carries  to  the  Gulf 
a  marvelous  precipitation.  These  waterways  offer 
sixteen  thousand  miles  of  navigable  water,  and  it 
has  been  said  that  its  great  body  of  tributaries  is 
more  generally  serviceable  for  transport  service 
than  that  of  any  other  river,  except  perhaps  the 
Amazon."  * 

Joliet  and  Marquette,  having  satisfied  themselves 
as  to  the  river's  course,  paused  at  a  point  now  in 
southern  Arkansas  which  Joliet  placed  at  33°  40' 
north  latitude,  and  turned  again  to  the  north. 
They  made  their  laborious  way  to  the  mouth  of  the 
Illinois,  over  whose  placid  and  well-shaded  surface 
they  paddled  northeast  to  the  Des  Plaines.  A 
little  eminence  about  forty  miles  southwest  of 

Justin  Winsor,  The  Mississippi  Basin  (Boston,  1895),  pp.  4-5. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


modern  Chicago  they  named  Mount  Joliet,  and  a 
community  begun  near  here  in  the  1830's,  on 
second  thought,  in  1842,  adopted  Joliet  as  its  name. 
The  portage  to  the  Chicago  River  was  hardly  a 
mile  and  a  half,  so  slight  is  the  divide  between 
the  great  river  systems,  and  the  explorers  easily 
made  their  way  to  Lake  Michigan  and  the  north.1 

The  name  of  Ren6  Robert  Cavalier,  the  Sieur  de 
larSalle,  is  forever  associated  with  the  exploration 
of  the  Mississippi  system.2  In  the  summer  of  16Q9 
he  started  upon  his  career  as  an  explorer.  Leaving 
his  seigniory  by  the  Lachine  Rapids,  about  eight 
miles  above  Montreal,  with  certain  Sulpitian 
priests  he  proceeded  up  the  St.  Lawrence  and 
along  the  southern  shore  of  Lake  Ontario,  stopping 
for  a  conference  with  the  Senecas  near  the  mouth 
of  the  Genesee  in  Irondequoit  Bay  (near  modern 
Rochester;  Map  lla).  He  continued  to  the  west 
ern  extremity  of  the  lakes  and  here  fell  in  with 
Joliet,  who,  returning  from  his  investigation  of 
the  copper  region,  had  been  the  first  white  man  to 
pass  from  Lake  Huron  to  Lake  Erie,  from  which, 
by  way  of  the  Grand  River  and  the  land  of  the 
Neutral  Indians,  he  had  come  to  Lake  Ontario. 
The  Sulpitians  left  La  Salle  and,  after  waiting  on 
the  shore  of  the  lake  to  the  south,  they  were  the 
first  to  reverse  the  route  of  Joliet,  reaching  Sault 
Ste.  Marie  in  May,  1670.  Meanwhile  La  Salle 
crossed  to  Lake  Erie  and  thence  in  some  way 
reached  as  far  west  as  the  Illinois.  According  to 
one  account  he  went  by  way  of  the  Allegheny 
(Map  17),  and  the  Ohio  to  some  point  beyond  the 
falls  near  modern  Louisville  (Map  47),  and  then 
overland;  according  to  another, by  way  of  the  lakes 
and  the  Chicago  portage.  In  1675  La  Salle  received 
his  patent  of  nobility  and  a  grant  of  Fort  Frontenac, 
which  had  been  set  up  in  1673  and  in  consideration 
for  which  he  was  to  explore  the  West. 

In  1678  his  preparations  were  complete.  A 
party  was  sent  ahead  to  construct  a  fort  at  Niag 


>  In  an  unfortunate  upset  in  the  rapids  above  Montreal,  im-^\jn 
portant  papers  were  lost,  and  the  account  had  to  be  written^ 


ara,  where  La  Salle  soon  joined  them  near  Grand 
Island,  above  the  falls,  and  began  the  building  of 
a  ship  called  the  Griffon.  When  this  was  done 
the  party  bore  west  under  a  spread  of  canvas  and, 
taking  aboard  La  Salle's  lieutenant,  Henri  le 
Tonty,  at  the  Detroit  River,  sailed  on  to  Green 
Bay  in  Lake  Michigan.  The  Griffon  was  dis 
patched  thence  with  a  cargo  of  furs,  to  return,  but 
the  crazy  ship,  ill  fabricated  of  green  timber,  dis 
appeared  in  a  gale  before  it  reached  the  Straits  of 
Mackinac.  La  Salle  and  Tonty,  taking  opposite 
shores  of  Lake  Michigan,  proceeded  to  the  St. 
Joseph  River.  After  carrying  to  the  Kankakee 
(Map  34),  they  floated  past  the  mouth  of  the  Des 
Plaines  and  on  down  the  Illinois  to  some  settle 
ments  of  Indians,  where  La  Salle  set  up  Fort 
Crevecceur. 

The  leader  now  determined  to  send  a  party  to 
explore  the  upper  waters  of  the  Mississippi,  while 
he  himself  investigated  the  lower,  and  Michel 
Accault  was  put  in  command,  with  Father  Louis 
Hennepin,  a  R6collet  friar,  detailed  to  accompany 
him.  The  detachment  thus  directed  made  their 
way  to  the  great  river  and  up  to  a  point  a  little  dis 
tance  beyond  the  mouth  of  the  Wisconsin,  where 
they  were  captured  by  a  party  of  Sioux.  As 
prisoners  they  continued  upstream  to  the  vicinity 
of  the  Falls  of  St.  Anthony  (St.  Paul;  Map  47), 
where  the  canoes  were  hidden,  and  the  company 
proceeded  overland  to  Lake  Buade,  about  seventy 
miles  due  north.  After  a  sojourn  here  Hennepin 
received  permission  to  leave,  and,  reaching  the 
Mississippi,  was  able  to  float  down  to  the  falls, 
which  he  named.  Near  here  he  and  his  boatmen 
fell  in  with  a  party  of  Sioux,  with  whom  Accault 
was  found,  and  the  parties  were  joined. 

We  must  now  turn  attention  to  Daniel  Greysolon 
Duluth  (or  Du  Lhut),  who  had  set  up  standards 
of  the  Grand  Monarch  of  France  throughout  the 
western  shoreland  of  Lake  Superior,  and  had  con 
structed  the  rude  Fort  Kaministiquia  (Map  13), 
Starting  from  this  country  in  June  of  the 


from  memory.  Marquette's  narrative  appears  in  the  Jesuit 
Relations,  a  great  series  of  records  now  translated  into  English 
and  published  in  seventy-three  volumes,  available  in  most  large 
libraries. 

2  The  most  readable  account  of  La  Salle's  adventures  is 
undoubtedly  that  of  Parkman  in  his  La  Salle  and  the  Discovery 
of  the  Great  West  (Boston),  1869. 


following  year,  he  soon  reached  the  St.  Croix,  where 
a  stockade  was  built.  He  floated  down  this  affluent 
of  the  great  river,  which  the  Indians  had  described 
to  him  and  which  he  believed  would  lead  to  the 
Gulf  of  California  in  the  South  Sea.  Stories  of 


122 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


white  men  among  the  Sioux  urged  him  forward 
and  he  fell  in  with  Hennepin's  party  on  the  Missis 
sippi.  But  instead  of  pressing  on  to  the  Pacific, 
after  hunting  through  the  neighborhood  the  leader 
decided  to  return.  With  six  other  Frenchmen  he 
took  the  Wisconsin  route  to  Green  Bay,  proceeded 
to  Machillimackinac  and  finally  to  the  Eastern 
settlements,  to  recite  the  story  of  their  hardships 
and  achievements. 

La  Salle  returned  to  Fort  Frontenac,  and  in 
1860  made  a  fruitless  visit  to  Fort  Crevecceur, 
which  he  found  in  ruins,  with  Tonty  and  the  rest 
fled  to  Machillimackinac  to  escape  the  warring 
Iroquois.  In  the  winter  of  1681,  with  some  fifty 
French  and  Indian  companions,  he  came  again  to 
cross  the  Chicago  portage  and  work  along  the 
frozen  Illinois  to  the  Mississippi,  down  which  they 
sped,  past  the  region  of  the  Arkansas,  where  Joliet 
and  Marquette  had  turned  about,  and  finally  to 
the  mouth. 

The  explorer,  who  had  carried  the  French  arms 
from  the  St.  Lawrence  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and 
named  Louisiana  in  honor  of  his  sovereign,  after 
ward,  in  1684,  enlisted  royal  patronage  for  a  settle 
ment  at  the  great  river's  mouth.  But  fumbling 
along  the  coast  of  Texas,  he  mistook  Matagorda 
Bay  (Map  41a)  for  such,  and  on  a  little  river  there 
set  up  a  colony  and  a  Fort  St.  Louis.  Disappoint 
ment  and  distress  resulted,  and  near  the  Trinity 
River,  inland  from  Galveston  Bay,  La  Salle  was 
assassinated.  The  colony  wasted  away  and  the 
French  attempts  to  gain  a  hold  in  Texas  were 
abandoned.  The  Spanish  soon  followed  La  Salle 
in  this  region,  beginning  in  1690  to  establish  their 
missions,  of  which  five  now  remain  in  ruins  at 
San  Antonio. 

But  French  ambitions  for  control  of  the  Missis 
sippi  Valley  were  still  cherished;  in  1699  Pierre  le 
Moyne  d'Iberville  led  out  an  expedition  to  the 


Gulf  coast,  and,  after  building  a  fort  at  Biloxi,  set 
up  another  on  the  Mississippi  about  forty  miles 
from  its  mouth  (Map  14).  Mobile,  named  after 
the  neighboring  Maubila  Indians,  a  Muskhogean 
tribe  (Map  6),  was  founded  in  1702  and  was  for  a 
time  the  capital  of  the  province.  But  in  1718 
the  "Western  Company,"  headed  by  John  Law, 
who  had  excited  France  with  his  financial  scheme  to 
exploit  the  natural  wealth  of  Louisiana,  sent  Jean 
Baptiste  le  Moyne,  Sieur  de  Bienville,  to  found 
the  town  of  New  Orleans,  which,  with  a  discourag 
ing  beginning,  became  the  most  prosperous  French 
city  in  America. 

The  French  had  carried  their  flag  over  a  noble 
domain,  and  yet  their  conquest  had  been  slow 
compared  with  that  of  the  Spaniards  who  followed 
Columbus.  And  the  French  posts,  so  impressive 
on  the  map,  were  generally  but  straggling  groups 
of  cabins,  each  with  a  knot  of  bickering  traders, 
two  or  three  priests,  and  a  tiny  guard  of  soldiers. 
There  were  few  homes.  The  priests,  though  the 
Recollets,  Sulpitians,  and  Jesuits  sometimes  checked 
one  another,  performed  a  mighty  service  for  France 
as  well  as  for  religion.  "Men  steeped  in  antique 
learning,  pale  with  the  close  breath  of  the  cloister, 
here  spent  the  noon  and  evening  of  their  lives, 
ruled  savage  hordes  with  mild,  parental  sway,  and 
stood  serene  before  the  direst  shapes  of  death."  l 
A  few  representative  missions  will,  if  located  (Map 
13),  serve  to  indicate  the  extent  of  this  service 
— those  of  the  Recollets  at  St.  Croix  by  Tadoussac 
(1600),  and  Three  Rivers  (1634);  those  of  the  Jesu 
its  at  Sault  Ste.  Marie  (1639),  La  Pointe  (1665), 
St.  Francis  Xavier  on  Green  Bay  (1671-72), 
St.  Ignace  (by  Marquette  in  1672),  and  St. 
Francis  de  Sales  (1683);  and  that  of  the  Sulpitians 
at  Quinte  Bay  on  the  northern  shore  of  Lake 
Ontario  (1668). 
1  F.  Parkman,  Pioneers  of  France  in  North  America,  p.  xiii. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  5 
THE  TOBACCO  COUNTRY:    VIRGINIA  AND  MARYLAND 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  45-58;   L.  G.  Tyler,  England  in  America,  chaps,  iii-vii. 
MAP:  South  Atlantic  States. 


WHILE  King  James  I  of  England  sought  a 
Spanish  wife  for  his  son  Charles,  the  cus 
tomary  plundering  of  the  galleys  of  Seville  was  re 
garded  inappropriate  and  the  capital  hitherto  em 
ployed  in  privateering  became  available  for  other 
enterprises.  Two  groups  of  merchants,  called,  re 
spectively,  the  London  and  the  Plymouth  com 
panies,  were  granted  patents  for  plantations  in 
the  region  vaguely  known  as  Virginia,  the  former 
to  have  the  coast  land  from  34°  to  38°  as  exclusively 
its  sphere,  and  the  latter  to  have  that  between 
41°  and  45°.  The  country  between  was  open  to 
either,  it  being  understood  that  a  settlement  in 
this  intermediate  zone  kept  out  rivals  for  a  dis 
tance  of  a  hundred  miles  on  each  side.  The 
companies  did  not  get  possession  of  the  whole  of 
their  regions,  but  only  the  right  each  to  stake  out 
within  its  assigned  area  a  colony  extending  along 
the  coast  fifty  miles  north  and  south  of  its  first 
plantation  and  inland  one  hundred  miles. 

When  Capt.  Christopher  Newport,  in  1607, 
sailed  through  the  fifteen-mile  strait  between  the 
capes  he  named  for  the  Princes  Charles  and  Henry, 
and  after  cautiously  traversing  the  shallows  came 
at  last  to  rest  in  the  deep  water  of  Hampton 
Roads,  he  called  the  land  near  by,  Point  Comfort 
(Map  7a).  Here  he  recognized  a  place  far  more 
opulent  and  eligible  for  settlement  than  those 
which  Raleigh's  men  had  found  some  twenty  years 
before  at  Roanoke  and  Croatoan,  the  former  indi 
cated  on  Map  7b  and  the  latter  lying  directly 
southwest  of  Cape  Hatteras.1  The  ship- worn  colo 
nists  surveying  the  banks  of  the  James  saw  a  smil 
ing  country  beautiful  in  May  foliage,  a  month 
ahead  of  that  at  home,  and  abounding  in  game  and 


1  Raleigh's  Virginia  patent  had  been  vacated  because  of  his 
attainder  of  treason  for  having  supported  a  rival  of  James  to 
the  English  throne. 


fish,  the  latter  so  numerous  in  many  of  the  rivers 
and  creeks  that  they  could  be  killed  with  sticks. 
"We  attempted,"  writes  Captain  Smith,  "to  catch 
them  with  a  frying  pan;  but  we  found  it  a  bad 
instrument  to  catch  fish  with."1  Besides  the  deer, 
small  bear,  opossum,  raccoon,  and  other  beasts 
whose  flesh  was  good  to  eat,  there  was  every  bird 
that  flourished  in  England,  except  the  peacock 
and  the  chicken.52 

But  more  interesting  were  the  Indians:  those 
of  the  Powhattan  Confederacy  scattered  along  the 
coast,  and  the  Piscataways  by  the  Potomac — 
both  Algonquian  (cf.  Map  6);  the  Iroquoian  Not- 
taways  to  the  south  of  the  Appomattox;  and  the 
Siouan  tribes,  the  Monacans  on  the  upper  James, 
with  the  Manahoacs  to  the  north  of  them  and  the 
Ocaneechis  to  the  south.  It  would  be  some  years 
before  Virginia  came  into  contact  with  the  Chero- 
kees  who  roamed  the  country  beyond  the  Blue  Ridge 
nearly  as  far  north  as  the  sources  of  the  James. 

Tidewater  Virginia,  described  by  the  geologists 
as  but  lately  risen  from  the  sea,  is  divided  into  three 
terraces;  the  first,  beginning  just  behind  the  shore 
strip,  is  composed  of  light  sands  and  clays,  most 
fertile  on  the  Norfolk  and  Accomac  peninsulas 
(Map  7a);  the  second  has  many  beds  of  coarse 
gravel  interspersed  with  yellow  and  blue  marl; 
the  third  is  higher,  but  of  the  same  formation. 
"Under  the  influence  of  a  mild  climate  and  the 
moisture  of  the  sea,  the  soil  is  prolific  in  many 
forms  of  vegetable  life,  but  soon  loses  its  fertility."3 
It  was  easily  adapted  to  tobacco  culture,  but  was 
exhausted  in  many  places  before  Virginia  became 
a  state.  Better  land  was  found  in  strips  along  the 

1  Works  of  Capt.  John  Smith  (edited  by  Edwin  Arber,  New 
York,  1884),  p.  418. 

2  P.  A.  Bruce,  Economic  History  of  Virginia  (New  York,  1896), 
vol.  i,  pp.  123-124. 

8  P.  A.  Bruce,  op.  rit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  76-77. 


124 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


James,  the  York  (with  its  two  affluents,  the  Pa- 
munkey  and  the  Mattapony),  the  Rappahannock, 
the  Potomac,  and  scores  of  smaller  streams  which 
rise  in  the  Blue  Ridge  or  cut  through  from  the 
Shenandoah  Valley.  On  these  alluvial  banks  were 
placed  the  principal  plantations,  leaving  wilderness 
between  the  rivers.  From  Map  7a  the  thirteen 
counties  which  had  been  formed  by  1652  may  be 
shown  with  dates  by  using  numbers  and  a  key. 
These,  it  may  be  seen  (Map  8),  are  mostly,  but  not 
entirely,  within  the  frontier  line.  The  conflict  of 
interest  between  the  coast  towns  and  the  back 
country  was  later,  in  1676,  illustrated  by  the  re 
bellion  of  Nathaniel  Bacon,  a  planter  living  near 
the  falls  of  the  James,  the  site  of  modern  Rich 
mond  (Map  16). 

Jamestown,  the  first  settlement  under  the  Lon 
don  Company's  charter  of  1606,  was  on  a  low  island, 
ill  chosen,  contrary  to  directions.  Not  only  was  it 
indefensible  against  the  Indians,  but  lay  open  to 
the  evil  winds  from  the  numerous  malarial  marshes, 
the  largest  of  which,  the  Great  Dismal  Swamp, 
may  be  indicated  as  southeast  of  the  Elizabeth 
River.  The  colony  was  first  reckoned  as  a  hun 
dred  miles  square,  but  in  1609  new  lines  were 
drawn  for  the  new  Virginia  Company.  It  was  then 
ambiguously  stated  that  this  territory  lay  two  hun 
dred  miles  along  the  coast  each  side  from  Old 
Point  Comfort  and  "up  into  the  land  throughout 
from  sea  to  sea,  west  and  northwest."  This  un 
certainty  gave  rise  to  controversies;  some  law 
officers  maintained  that  the  southern  line  should 
run  northwest  and  the  northern  line  due  west,  but 


the  company  and  the  colonists  chose  to  interpret 
it  the  other  way,  which,  instead  of  a  small  triangle, 
gave  them  constantly  diverging  lines,  including 
even  parts  of  the  great  lakes.  This  helps  us  to 
understand  why  Virginia  sent  Washington  to  warn 
off  the  French  in  1754,  and  George  Rogers  Clark 
to  clear  the  West  of  British  in  1778. 

The  charter  for  Maryland,  issued  to  the  son  of 
the  Catholic  Lord  Baltimore  in  1632,  superseded 
part  of  Virginia's  claim.  The  Potomac,  with  a 
line  east  from  its  mouth,  across  Chesapeake  Bay 
and  the  peninsula  called  the  Eastern  Shore,  formed 
the  southern  boundary;  on  the  west  it  had,  unlike 
Virginia,  a  definite  land  limit,  a  line  due  north 
from  the  westernmost  head  of  the  Potomac;  the 
northern  line  was  the  fortieth  degree  of  latitude. 
It  was  not  until  1767  that  the  present  boundary 
of  39°  43'  was  surveyed  by  twro  English  engineers, 
Charles  Mason  and  Jeremiah  Dixon,  thus  ending 
a  long  controversy  between  the  proprietors  of 
Maryland  and  Pennsylvania.  Using  Maps  8  and 
10,  one  may  find  Kent  Island  (where  Claiborne 
had  taken  possession  under  a  Virginia  grant),  the 
principal  Maryland  settlements,  the  counties,  and 
the  frontier  line  by  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  town  of  Bal 
timore  was  not  founded  till  1729  (Map  16),  but  it 
grew  so  rapidly  that  in  Revolutionary  time  its 
population  numbered  eight  thousand,  profiting,  as 
it  did,  by  the  trade  of  the  Susquehannah  Valley 
of  Pennsylvania,  just  as  Norfolk  controlled  much 
of  the  commerce  of  North  Carolina. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  6 
NEW  ENGLAND:   THE  HOME  OF  A  MARITIME  PEOPLE 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  59-71;   Tyler,  England  in  America,  chaps,  ix-xvi. 
MAP:  New  England. 


IN  this  map  study  attention  is  directed  to  the 
rocky  coast  which  stretches  from  the  St.  Croix 
River  nearly  to  Manhattan  Island,  pierced  with 
many  a  navigable  inlet  and  estuary,  as  if  devised 
by  nature  as  the  home  of  a  maritime  people. 


Portuguese,  Frenchmen,  and  Englishmen  had 
sailed  along  this  coast  during  the  sixteenth  cen 
tury,  but  Bartholomew  Gosnold,  in  1602,  was  prob 
ably  the  first  to  sail  straight  across  the  Atlantic  in 
these  latitudes,  thus  avoiding  the  Spaniards  in 


125 


\ 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


the  southern  waters.  He  made  a  temporary  settle 
ment  at  the  western  end  of  the  Elizabeth  Islands 
opposite  Martha's  Vineyard  (Map  9).  This  latter 
name,  applied  at  first  to  a  smaller  neighboring 
island,  was  probably  in  its  original  form,  "Mar 
tin's  Vineyard,"  called  after  one  of  Gosnold's  crew. 
There  were  numerous  other  voyages  and  probably 
several  unremembered  trading  settlements. 

The  exploration  of  the  Kennebec  by  Weymouth 
searching  for  the  northwest  passage,  in  1605,  as 
reported  in  England,  made  such  an  impression 
that  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges  and  other  patrons  fur 
thered  exploration,  and  the  London  and  Plymouth 
companies  were  organized  and  assigned  areas  for 
patents.  That  of  the  latter  extended  from  Long 
Island  to  Passamaquoddy  Bay,  and  under  it  Chief- 
Justice  Popham  sent  out  a  colony,  which  set  up 
at  Sagadahoc,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Kennebec 
(Map  8).  Though  this  was  abandoned  because  of 
cold  and  famine,  the  company,  reorganized  as 
the  Council  for  New  England  in  1620,  continued 
to  bestow  rights  to  settlement. 

In  1614  this  company  employed  John  Smith  to 
explore  the  coast  of  the  great  bay  lying  between 
40°  and  44°  north  latitude,  which  he  named  New 
England  because  of  certain  similarities  to  the  home 
land.  Of  the  local  names  bestowed  by  him,  Capes 
Elizabeth  and  Ann,  Ipswich,  Plymouth,  and  the 
Charles  River  yet  remain,  and  may  be  indicated 
on  the  outline  map  together  with  a  letter  S  in 
parentheses. 

About  the  time  of  Captain  Smith's  visit  the 
Indians  along  the  coast  were  decimated  by  a  pesti 
lence,  a  fact  which  encouraged  colonial  enterprise 
and  facilitated  settlement.  It  was  found  when 
communities  had  come  to  be  established  at  some 
distance  from  the  shore  that  the  upland  Indians 
were  a  more  formidable  foe.  The  position  of  the 
principal  tribes  important  in  relation  to  the  whites 
may  be  located  as  follows:  the  Abenakis  in  the 
Kennebec  and  Penobscot  Valleys  (Map  43a);  the 
Pennacooks  or  Pawtuckets  of  New  Hampshire; 
the  Massachusetts  along  the  Charles;  the  Wampa- 
noags  south  of  Plymouth;  the  Narragansetts  in 
the  north  of  modern  Rhode  Island;  Pequots  and 
Niantics  along  the  shore  between  the  Connecticut 
and  Narragansett  Bay;  the  Nipmucs  in  central 


Massachusetts;  the  Wappingers  from  the  lower 
Connecticut  across  the  Hudson,  with  their  kinsmen 
of  the  Mohicans  to  the  north. 

The  boundaries  of  the  New  England  colonies 
were  frequently  in  dispute.  Massachusetts^  ex 
treme  northern  claim,  as  "three  miles  north  of  the 
Merrimac,"  is  shown  on  Map  8.  This  explains 
the  northern  extent  of  the  claims  of  that  state  pre 
ferred  later  in  western  New  York  and  the  region  of 
Lake  Michigan  (Map  2 la).  Connecticut's  bounds 
were  long  disputed.  Her  controversy  with  Rhode 
Island  was  too  complicated  for  discussion  here, 
inasmuch  as  the  final  line  was  fairly  regular.  The 
oblong  indentation  in  the  northern  boundary,  ob 
servable  on  large  maps,  is  a  reminder  of  the  igno 
rance  of  two  "mathematicians"  who,  in  1642,  made 
a  survey  for  Massachusetts,  for  that  colony  claimed 
a  line  running  just  north  of  Windsor,  and  Connec 
ticut  finally  reclaimed  all  but  this  oblong.  The 
odd-looking  extension  at  the  southwest  is  thus 
accounted  for:  Connecticut  settlers,  because  of  a 
temporary  boundary  understanding  in  1664,  made 
their  homes  along  the  Sound  almost  to  Mamaroneck, 
and  in  1683  New  York  agreed  that  most  of  these 
towns  should  stay  in  Connecticut,  allowing  them 
the  eight  miles  of  depth.1  New  York,  however, 
whose  boundary  was  supposed  to  be  about  twenty 
miles  east  of  the  Hudson,  obtained  in  recompense 
a  strip  two  miles  broad  from  Connecticut  and  run 
ning  to  the  Massachusetts  line;  this  was  called 
the  "equivalent  tract." 

The  extent  of  the  settlements  by  the  middle  of 
the  seventeenth  century,  together  with  the  chief 
natural  features,  should  be  shown;  and  twelve 
towns,  connecting  with  each  some  historical  fact, 
by  means  of  a  key  sheet.  Show  also  the  frontier 
line  in  1689.  There  are  no  such  waves  of  movement 
up  a  river  as  we  see  along  the  Hudson  and  the 
James.  Had  the  Mayflower  come  to  land  in  the 
mouth  of  the  Connecticut  River,  the  history  might 
have  been  different;  but  the  lines  of  human  de 
velopment  actually  were  transverse  rather  than 
longitudinal.2  This  was  a  condition  valuable  for 
political  solidarity  as  well  as  for  defense. 


1  Our  Map  9  fails  to  make  this  indication;  see  Map  24. 

2  A.  P.  Brigham,  Geographical  Influences  in  American  History, 
p.  59. 


126 


MAP  STUDY  No.  7 


THE  DUTCH  AND  QUAKER  COLONIES:  GREAT  GRANTS  AND  SMALL 

FARMS 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  72-76,  83-88;  Tyler,  England  in  America,  pp.  291-295;  C.  M.  Andrews,  Colonial 

Self-government,  chaps,  v-viii,  xi,  xii. 
MAP:  Middle  States. 


THOUGH  settled  slowly  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  the  middle  group  of  colonies,  partly 
because  of  their  geographical  position,  were  of  great 
importance,  and  were  finally,  by  1825,  to  surpass 
the  other  groups  in  population.  On  four  consid 
erations  New  York  was  fit  to  be  the  "seat  of 
empire."  Its  well-protected  harbor,  admired  by 
Verrazano  and  Hudson,  with  deep  water  clear  to 
three  different  shores,  would  of  itself  have  given 
it  a  noble  destiny.  It  was  of  great  strategic  value 
because  the  Hudson  and  Champlain  Valleys  made 
an  easy  road  from  or  into  Canada,  which  was  for 
over  a  century  in  the  hands  of  a  hostile  power. 
In  Map  Study  No,  3  it  was  observed  that  here 
alone,  along  the  Mohawk  trough  cut  through 
by  the  glacier,  does  the  Appalachian  system 
lapse  in  all  its  parts,  making  thus  a  gateway  to 
the  great  interior  of  North  America,  a  road  for 
wealth  and  people.  And  New  York  would  have 
been  important,  if  for  no  other  reason,  because  it 
was  the  land  of  the  Iroquois,  "the  Romans  of  the 
West." 

The  location  of  the  five  "nations"  of  the  con 
federacy  may  be  indicated  from  Map  lla.  In 
1713  the  Tuscaroras,  of  North  Carolina,  who  are 
shown  on  Map  6  to  be  of  Iroquoian  stock,  were 
badly  beaten  by  the  whites  and  soon  afterward 
came  north  to  settle  with  their  kinsmen  near 
Oneida  Lake.  Though  not  very  numerous  l  the 
Iroquois  were  recognized  as  the  most  effective 
savage  fighters  on  the  continent.  The  Mohicans 

1  About  1670  the  warriors  of  the  Five  Nations  were  reckoned 
by  the  French  and  English  as  2,000  (see  G.  W.  Schuyler,  Colonial 
New  York,  New  York,  1885,  vol.  i,  p.  309),  while  nearly  a  cen 
tury  later,  because  of  wars  and  famine,  Sir  William  Johnson 
believed  that  there  were  no  more  than  that  number  (Documentary 
History  of  New  York,  vol.  iv,  p.  428). 


extended  to  the  upper  Hudson,  while  the  Wap- 
pingers,  of  the  same  stock,  occupied  what  is  now 
Westchester,  Putnam,  Dutchess,  Rockland  and 
Orange  Counties,  reaching  to  the  Munsees,  who 
held  the  region  south  of  the  Mohawks.  On  Long 
Island,  the  Canarsees  held  the  west,  the  Shinne- 
cocks  the  center,  and  the  Montauks  the  east.  About 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  Iroquois 
drove  the  Delawares,  or  Lenapes,  out  of  the  river 
valley  that  bears  their  name  (Map  13)  into  eastern 
Ohio  (Map  15b).  The  French  constantly  attempted, 
without  permanent  success,  to  attach  the  Iroquois 
to  their  interest,  and  sent  them  missionaries  as 
well  as  soldier-diplomats.  Father  Isaac  Jogues 
came  to  the  Mohawk  country  in  1642,  giving  the 
name  of  Lac  St.  Sacrament  to  the  body  of  water 
later,  in  1755,  called  Lake  George.  The  mission 
of  the  Abbe  Picquet,  founded  about  a  century 
later  at  Fort  de  la  Presentation  (now  Ogdensburg), 
is  shown  on  Map  13. 

The  frontier  line  drawn  on  Map  8  indicates  ap 
proximately  the  extent  of  Dutch  settlement  in 
the  Hudson  Valley,  though  in  1652  a  settlement 
was  made  at  Roundout  Creek  and  in  1661  Wiltwick 
(Kingston;  Map  9)  was  chartered,  while  Schenec- 
tady  was  founded  in  the  same  year.  The  names  on 
Map  9  show  that  northeastern  New  Jersey  was 
within  the  sphere  of  Dutch  settlement,  whereas 
those  on  eastern  Long  Island  bear  quite  as  unmis 
takable  witness  to  New  England  origin,  most  of 
them  from  Connecticut  and  New  Haven.1  But 
other  stocks  were  represented  in  the  seventeenth 
century;  indeed,  the  first  settlement  had  been  made 

1  Between  1650  and  1654  Connecticut  claimed  jurisdiction  of 
eastern  Long  Island;  see  the  account  in  Richard  Hildreth'i 
History  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1849),  vol.  i,  p.  438; 
vol.  ii,  p.  44. 


127 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


in  1614  on  the  site  of  the  Brooklyn  Navy  Yard  by 
Flemish  Protestants  known  as  the  Walloons,  while 
in  1677  New  Paltz  was  founded  by  Huguenots  who 
had  been  some  time  in  the  colony,  and  New 
Rochelle  was  bought  and  settled  by  others  who 
came  shortly  after  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of 
Nantes  in  1685. 

The  Dutch  West  India  Company,  after  its  per 
manent  settlement  of  Manhattan  Island  in  1623, 
hesitated  between  a  policy  of  maintaining  a  mere 
trading  post  and  one  of  colonization.  A  partial 
victory  for  the  latter  brought  out  the  scheme  of 
1629,  in  which  provision  was  included  for  patroons. 
Six  such  were  constituted,  holding  lands  in  what 
is  now  Delaware  and  New  Jersey  as  well  as  New 
York,  but  only  Van  Rensselaer  was  finally  suc 
cessful  with  his  great  estate  of  Rensselaerswyck. 
At  the  time  of  the  Revolution  this  had  grown  to 
a  tract  of  1,132,000  acres,  or  1,770  square  miles — 
an  area  sixty  times  the  size  of  Manhattan  Island — 
running  south  on  both  banks  of  the  Hudson  from 
the  mouth  of  the  Mohawk,  in  what  is  now  Albany 
and  Rensselaer  Counties.  Besides  this  there  were 
200,000  acres  in  Columbia  County  in  the  hands  of 
the  family.1  The  English  governors  continued  the 
unfortunate  practice  of  granting  huge  patents,  so 
that,  about  1700,  three-fourths  of  the  province 
was  alleged  to  be  in  the  hands  of  some  thirty 
persons.  The  grant  to  Johannes  Hardenburgh, 
patented  in  1708,  of  what  is  now  Sullivan  County 
and  the  southeastern  half  of  Delaware,  together 
with  substantial  parts  of  Greene  and  Ulster  (Map 
lla),  may  stand  as  an  example  of  their  large  hold 
ings.  The  southern  third  of  Columbia  County  was 
the  Livingston  Manor.  These  patents,  with  their 
uncertain  boundaries  and,  where  settled,  their  pe 
culiar  restrictions  on  the  tenantry,  combined  with 
the  frontier  situation  of  New  York  and  the  pres 
ence  of  the  Iroquois  to  discourage  the  growth  of 
that  colony. 

The  Swedish  settlement  on  the  Delaware,  es 
pecially  Fort  Christina  (Wilmington)  and  Fort 
New  Elfsborg,  should  be  shown,  while  Fort  Nas 
sau  and  ill-fated  Swaanandael  (now  Lewes,  Dela 
ware)  recall  the  overlapping  Dutch  claims  based 

1  See  Cadwallader  Colder's  map  reproduced  in  Justin  Winsor, 
History,  vol.  v,  pp.  230-237. 


on  Hudson's  discovery  of  the  "South  River." 
Fort  Good  Hope,  on  the  Connecticut,  built  in 
1634  near  modern  Hartford,  placed  the  Dutch  as 
traders  on  that  river  as  well  as  on  the  Hudson,  the 
Mohawk,  and  the  Delaware. 

Although  New  Haven  Puritans  were  on  the 
Delaware  in  1641  (two  years  later  ejected  by  the 
Swedes,  who  built  New  Elfsborg),  and  at  Newark 
in  1666,  the  English  settlement  of  the  peninsula 
of  New  Jersey  did  not  make  headway  until  the 
later  'sixties.  Then  Sir  George  Carteret  began  to 
develop  the  eastern  part  of  the  peninsular  of  New 
Jersey,  which  the  Duke  of  York  had  granted  to 
him  and  Lord  John  Berkeley  in  1664.  Ten  years 
afterward  the  latter  conveyed  his  part  to  cer 
tain  Quakers,  of  whom  William  Penn  was  the 
leader.  The  following  year  the  settlement  of  Salem 
(Map  10)  was  made,  and  in  1677  that  of  Burling 
ton.  In  1676  the  "quintipartite  deed"  fixed  the 
line  between  East  and  West  Jersey  as  shown  upon 
our  map.  In  1682  East  Jersey  also  came  into  the 
hands  of  prominent  Quakers  and  others,  though  it 
was  separately  ruled,  with  its  capital  after  1686 
at  Perth  or  Perth  Amboy.1  Although,  in  1692, 
after  the  fall  of  the  Dominion  of  New  England  of 
which  the  Jerseys  were  a  part,  the  two  provinces 
had  a  common  governor,  and  from  1701  were 
united  as  one  government  under  the  governor  of 
New  York  till  1738,  when  a  separate  governor  was 
assigned  to  New  Jersey,  the  old  sectional  difference 
between  the  east  and  west  persisted  throughout 
the  colonial  period.  The  eastern  settlements  from 
their  New  England  origin  used  the  township  sys 
tem  of  local  government,  while  the  western  used 
the  county.  Until  1790,  when  Trenton  was  se 
lected  as  the  capital,  the  legislature  met  in  alternate 
years  at  Burlington  and  Perth  Amboy.  The  south 
ern  part  of  New  Jersey  was  settled  slowly  and  to 
this  day  the  south  central  portion,  known  as  the 
"cranberry  country,"  is  very  sparsely  populated. 

The  early  settlements  of  Pennsylvania  were  con 
fined  to  the  region  of  the  lower  Delaware,  and  were, 
of  course,  made  chiefly  by  Quakers  at  or  near 
Philadelphia  in  1682.  From  the  beginning,  how- 

1  This  curious  name  demands  explanation.  The  original 
Indian  name  was  supposed  to  be  Amboy;  in  1684  the  proprietors 
called  it  Perth  after  James,  Earl  of  Perth,  one  of  their  number. 
Soon  the  names  were  combined. 


128 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


ever,  the  colony  was  cosmopolitan;  on  our  map 
are  shown  Merion,  settled  by  Welsh  as  part  of 
their  "barony"  in  1682,  and  Germantown  by 
Mennonites  in  1683.  Newcastle,  Upland,  and 
other  settlements  of  Swedes,  Finns,  and  Dutch 
were  there  when  Penn  arrived.  But  the  regions 
subsequently  settled  by  the  Germans  and  Scotch- 
Irish  we  shall  have  occasion  to  consider  in  a  later 
map  study. 

Penn's  controversy  with  Baltimore  over  the 
southern  boundary  we  have  mentioned;  he  like 
wise  disputed  with  the  Duke  of  York  as  to  whether 
the  northern  line  was  at  42°  or  43°,  and  with 
Virginia  at  the  west  (see  Map  16),  which  question 
was  not  settled  finally  until  1784  in  Penn's  favor. 


When  after  the  temporary  reconquest  by  the 
Dutch,  in  1672-74,  the  old  jurisdiction  of  their 
holdings  was  restored  to  the  Duke  of  York,  he 
determined  that  none  should  encroach  upon  New 
castle,  his  seat  of  government  for  the  Delaware 
region,  and  fixed  his  boundary  by  an  arc  drawn 
with  that  place  as  a  center  and  a  radius  of  twelve 
miles.  This  was  later  retained  as  the  boundary 
of  the  Three  Lower  Counties,  New  Castle,  Kent, 
and  Sussex,  shown  on  our  Map  10.  Because  of 
economic  and  political  rivalries,  in  1691  Penn 
gave  a  deputy  governor  to  these  counties;  in  1704 
they  obtained  a  separate  assembly,  and  in  1710 
a  separate  council.  They  remained  until  1776 
under  the  authority  of  the  governor  of  Pennsylvania. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  8 
THE  SOUTHERN  PLANTATIONS:    THE  CAROLINAS  AND  GEORGIA 

Supplement:    Attempt  at  Government  System 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  81-83,  106-110,  71,  92-98;  Andrews,  Colonial  Self-government,  pp.  129-161;  Greene, 

Provincial  America,  pp.  249-269. 
MAP:  South  Atlantic  States. 


THE  early  settlers  of  the  southern  colonies  had 
to  contend  with  tribes  of  fierce  and  cunning 
Indians.  Relations,  sometimes  of  trade,  some 
times  of  war,  were  kept  up  with  the  Yemassees 
in  the  valley  of  the  Savannah  (Map  7b),  the  Ca- 
tawbas  on  the  Wataree  (Map  lib),  and  the  Tus- 
caroras  on  the  Neuse  (Map  7b),  while  occasionally 
they  came  into  contact  with  the  Creeks,  who 
reached  around  the  southern  spurs  of  the  moun 
tains  to  beyond  the  Altamaha  (Map  lib);  the 
Seminoles  of  Florida  (Map  15b);  the  Chickasaws, 
who  ranged  the  middle  course  of  the  Tennessee; 
and  the  Iroquoian  Cherokees,  whose  dominion 
ran  along  the  valleys  well  up  into  Virginia  (see 
also  Map  6). 

King  Charles  II  in  1663  and  1665  conveyed  to 
eight  favorites  the  rights  of  property  and  juris 
diction  between  29°  and  36°  30'  north  latitude. 
By  1669  the  proprietors  were  ready  to  begin  the 

9  129 


colony,  and,  gathering  up  their  colonists  in  Eng 
land,  Barbadoes,  and  Bermuda,  islands  which  may 
be  observed  on  Map  12,  but  cannot  well  be  in 
dicated  in  this  study,  they  established  a  settle 
ment  on  Albemarle  Point  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Ashley  River  (Map  7b).  This  situation  proving 
somewhat  unfavorable,  many  soon  removed  to  the 
neck  between  the  Ashley  and  Cooper  Rivers,  both 
named  for  Anthony  Ashley  Cooper,  a  proprietor, 
beginning  there  a  community  now  known  as 
Charleston.  The  older  settlement  was  abandoned 
in  1680,  when  the  new  Charles  Town  was  made 
the  seat  of  government.  Colleton,  Berkeley,  Craven 
(next  to  the  the  north),  and  Clarendon  Counties, 
all  bearing  names  of  proprietors,  were  marked  off, 
the  colonists  keeping  close  to  the  coast. 

The  configuration  of  the  land  as  well  as  the  spirit 
of  John  Locke's  "Fundamental  Constitutions,"  pre 
pared  in  England  for  the  noble  proprietors,  sug- 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


gested  large  plantations.  The  sea  islands,  with 
a  coast  land  some  ten  miles  broad,  of  similar  sandy 
loam,  stretching  from  the  mouth  of  the  Savannah 
to  that  of  the  Pedee  (Map  lib),  were  later  famous 
for  their  cotton.  Behind  this  is  a  band  about 
thirty  miles  in  width,  abounding  in  fresh- water 
swamps  by  which  great  quantities  of  rice  were 
soon  to  be  produced;  and  farther  inland  a  narrow 
belt  of  pine  and  grass  where  cattle  were  pastured. 
Within  these  districts  the  colonial  activity  of 
southern  Carolina  was  largely  confined,  the  coastal 
region  being  disproportionately  represented  long 
after  the  back  country  was  fairly  well  peopled. 
The  settlement  naturally  followed  the  coast  and 
the  rivers,  as  illustrated  by  the  Huguenots  along 
the  Santee.1 

Besides  the  communities  near  Charles  Town,  in 
Albermale  County  there  was  a  settlement  far 
to  the  north,  near  the  Great  Dismal  Swamp  (Map 
Study  No.  5),  where  conditions  were  quite  dif 
ferent.  "But  for  the  peculiar  conformation  of  its 
coast,  North  Carolina,  rather  than  Virginia,  would 
doubtless  have  been  the  first  American  state.  It 
was  upon  Roanoke  Island  (Map  7b)  that  the 
earliest  attempts  were  made,  but  Ralph  Lane,  in 
1585,  already  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Chesapeake  region  would  afford  better  opportuni 
ties.  First  and  foremost,  the  harborage  was  spoiled 
by  the  prevalent  sand  bars.  Then  huge  pine  bar 
rens  near  the  coast  hindered  the  first  efforts  of  the 
planter,  and  extensive  malarial  swamps  imperiled 
his  life.  ...  It  was  only  by  the  coast  that  the  con 
ditions  were  thus  forbidding."  2  This  description 
applies  to  the  coast  land  south,  but  not  north,  of 
Albemarle  Sound. 

Although  the  province  of  Carolina  was  in  theory 
one,  the  settlements  on  either  side  of  the  Cape 
Fear  River  had  separate  governments  from  the 
beginning,  and  from  1713  were  practically  two 
provinces.  A  boundary  line  was  attempted  in 
1732,  but  was  not  finally  agreed  upon  until  1815. 
Because  of  the  failure  of  the  proprietors  to  provide 
defense  against  the  Tuscaroras  in  1711,  and  against 
the  Yemassees  in  1715,  and  on  other  grounds  of 

1  W.  A.  Schaper,  "Sectionalism  in  South  Carolina,"  American 
Historical  Association  Report,  1900,  vol.  i,  p.  269. 

8  John  Fiske,  Old  Virginia  and  Her  Neighbors,  vol.  ii,  pp. 
309-310. 


inefficiency,  the  proprietary  rights  of  government 
were  surrendered  in  the  southern  province  in  1719 
and  in  the  northern  in  1729,  after  which  the  Caro- 
linas  were  ruled  as  royal  provinces. 

As  the  country  of  the  Iroquois  and  of  the  Abenaki 
tribes  in  Maine  was  disputed  with  the  French,  so 
the  region  south  of  Charles  Town  was  claimed  and 
fought  for  by  the  Spanish.  There  had  been  war 
along  this  southern  coast  and  through  the  woods 
in  1G86,  and  from  1703  to  1706.  Although  no  at 
tempt  was  made  by  the  Carolina  proprietors  to 
colonize  as  far  as  their  boundary  line  of  29°  (Map 
14),  which  was  really  south  of  St.  Augustine,  the 
provincial  government  built  several  forts,  the  chief 
of  which  was  Fort  George  on  the  Altamaha  River. 
The  project  of  a  barrier  colony  brought  forward  by 
James  Edward  Oglethorpe  in  1732  was,  therefore, 
well  received  by  the  English  ministers,  though  per 
sonally  he  seems  to  have  had  in  mind  no  more 
the  protection  against  the  Spaniards  and  the  de 
velopment  of  English  trade  than  an  asylum  for 
debtors  and  others — a  "place  of  refuge  for  the 
distressed  people  of  Britain  and  the  persecuted 
Protestants  of  Europe." 

The  charter  to  Oglethorpe  and  other  trustees 
in  1732,  when  supplemented  by  a  conveyance  from 
a  Carolina  proprietor,  gave  them  control  of  land 
between  the  Savannah  and  the  Altamaha  "and 
westerly  from  the  heads  of  the  said  rivers  respec 
tively,  in  direct  lines  to  the  south  seas,"  but  Ogle 
thorpe  soon  pushed  his  settlements  to  the  St. 
Johns  (Map  34).  The  early  population  of  Georgia 
reflected  the  purposes  of  its  founders.  Savannah 
(Map  lib)  first  laid  out  was  occupied  by  "de 
cayed  people,"  i.e.,  debtors  released  from  English 
prisons;  Waldensian  Protestants  recently  driven 
from  Salzburg,  then  in  Bavaria,  built  the  town  of 
New  Ebenezer,  twenty-five  miles  up  the  river; 
Frederica  was  established  as  a  military  garrison 
on  St.  Simon  Island  just  southeast  of  the  mouth 
of  the  Altamaha,  while  on  the  other  side  of  this 
little  sound  was  Darien,  or  New  Inverness,  settled 
by  Scotch  Highlanders;  Augusta,  far  up  the 
Savannah  River,  was  a  trading  settlement  set  up 
by  Carolinians.  Forts  William  and  St.  Andrew, 
and  St.  George  at  the  mouth  of  the  St.  Johns, 
stood  as  sentinels  against  the  Spanish  at  St. 


130 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OP  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


Augustine.    The  extent  of  the  Spanish  claim  may 
be  indicated  from  Map  14. 

SUPPLEMENT 

ATTEMPTS  AT  GOVERNMENTAL  SYSTEM 

From  your  reading  mark  with  a  black  C  the  colonies 
included  in  the  New  England  Confederation  of  1643, 


and  with  a  black  D  those  in  the  Dominion  of  New 
England  (1688-89)  indicating  the  portion  under  a  dep 
uty  governor.  Show  the  form  of  government  of  each 
colony  after  1729,  making  note  of  the  change  in 
Georgia  in  1753.  The  English  Eevolution  of  1688 
and  1689  certainly  influenced  American  affairs;  lo 
cate  places  where  there  were  violent  readjustments  hi 
those  years. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  9 
SOCIETY  AND  COMMERCE  IN  THE  YOUNG  AMERICAN  COMMUNITIES 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  134-158;  Tyler,  England  in  America,  pp.  210-228;   Andrews,  Colonial  Self-govern 
ment,  pp.  304-336;    Greene,  Provincial  America,  chaps,  xiv,  xvi-xviii. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 


A  MERICA  has  grown  great  and  won  the  world's 
•LM.  regard  by  welcoming  to  her  shores  men  of 
every  race,  creed,  and  class.  Though  the  early 
immigrants  were  mostly  from  England,  they  lived 
as  neighbors  with  the  steady,  thrifty  Dutch  and 
Swedish  settlers  on  the  Delaware  and  Hudson 
Rivers,  and  now  were  joined  by  ambitious  poor 
or  refugees  from  religious  and  political  persecution 
in  many  parts  of  western  Europe. 

The  Huguenots  came  from  France  in  the  reign 
of  Louis  XIV,  although  some  had  first  sought 
refuge  in  England  and  the  German  Palatinate. 
They  settled  most  numerously  in  South  Carolina 
along  the  Santee  River  (Map  lib),  though  some 
made  their  homes  on  the  James  near  Henrico 
(Map  7a)  in  Virginia;  in  New  York  City,  New 
Paltz  (Map  9),  and  New  Rochelle  (Map  18b);  in 
Rhode  Island;  here  and  there  in  Pennsylvania;  in 
Orleans,  on  Cape  Cod,  and,  to  a  small  extent, 
in  Boston.  They  seem  unimportant  in  the  census 
records,  but  in  proportion  to  their  number  theirs 
was  the  most  valuable  stock  that  went  into  the 
making  of  America. 

Germany  planted  no  colonies,  as  it  had  no 
political  unity  or  national  government  until  the 
nineteenth  century,  but  because  of  the  devasta 
tion  of  the  Palatinate  by  the  land-greedy  Louis 
XIV,  the  hopeless  economic  position  of  the  peas 
ants,  and  the  discrimination  by  the  princes  against 


certain  pietistic  sects,  many  companies  and  in 
dividuals  came  to  America.  On  the  map  of  Penn 
sylvania  we  have  recorded  the  Mennonite  settle 
ment  made  in  response  to  Penn's  invitation.  In  1709 
and  1710  Palatine  refugees  in  England  were  sent  by 
that  government  to  New  Berne,  North  Carolina 
(Map  16), and  to  New  York.  In  the  latter  province 
they  were  located  near  modern  Newburgh  and 
along  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Hudson  from  Rhine- 
beck  up  to  Germantown  (Columbia  and  part  of 
Dutchess  County  (Map  lla),  on  land  bought  from 
the  Livingstons,  and  set  to  work  preparing  pitch 
for  the  English  navy.  Finding  this  irksome,  most 
of  them  crossed  to  the  Schoharie  Valley  (Schoharie 
County),  but  their  land  titles  were  disputed  and 
a  considerable  number  of  them  again  moved  on 
about  1725.  Some  went  to  the  Mohawk,  settling 
for  nearly  fifty  miles  along  the  river,  where  their 
settlement  is  recalled  in  names  like  German  Flats, 
Mannheim,  Minden,  Palatine,  Frankfort,  Oppen- 
heim,  Newkirk,  and  Herkimer,  although  those 
places  need  not  be  located.  More  made  their  way 
into  Pennsylvania,  settling  on  Tulpehocken  Creek 
near  the  site  of  modern  Reading  (Map  21a). 

The  Palatines  were  the  first  large  group  of 
German-Americans,  but  were  only  one.  Moravi 
ans,  Mennonites,  Dunkards,  and  Schwenkfelders, 
whose  beliefs  as  to  baptism  and  whose  peculiar 
manners  could  be  studied  by  the  help  of  an  ency- 


131 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


clopedia,  as  well  as  Lutherans,  Catholics,  and 
others,  came  as  immigrants,  many  of  them  in 
denturing  themselves  to  service  to  pay  their  pas 
sage.  They  did  not  linger  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  Philadelphia,  where,  in  the  old  Quaker 
country,  land  was  highly  priced,  but  spread  in  all 
directions,  so  that  the  region  southwest  of  the 
Blue  Mountains  of  the  Kittatinny  Range — that 
is,  the  territory  which  any  modern  detailed  map  of 
Pennsylvania  will  show  as  the  counties  of  North 
ampton,  Lehigh,  Montgomery,  Berks,  Lebanon, 
Lancaster,  Adams,  Cumberland,  and  Franklin — 
is  still  famous  as  the  home  of  the  "Pennsylvania 
Dutch."  Some  crossed  the  Delaware  and  became 
a  part  of  the  population  of  northwestern  New 
Jersey;  but  many  more  families  went  on  into 
Maryland,  the  Virginian  piedmont,  here  and  there 
through  the  Shenandoah  Valley  and  along  the  up- 
country  of  the  Carolinas  west  of  the  great  pine 
barrens.  Salem,  North  Carolina  (Map  34),  the 
center  of  the  old  Moravian  colony  of  Wachovia, 
and  Saxe-Gotha,  near  modern  Columbia,  and 
Orangeburg,  South  Carolina,  among  other  places, 
recall  the  German  settlements. 

The  Scotch-Irish,  in  the  early  part  of  the  eigh 
teenth  century,  found  their  position  in  the  province 
of  Ulster  growing  more  intolerable.  Their  land 
titles  were  challenged  and  the  English  government 
harassed  them,  along  with  other  Irishmen,  with 
religious  regulation  and  discriminating  tariff  laws. 
Many  emigrated  to  America,  some  settling  in 
Maine,  where  Belfast  (Map  34)  stands  as  a  re 
minder,  some  at  Londonderry,  New  Hampshire  (a 
little  southeast  of  Chester;  Map  34),  and  some  in 
valleys  of  the  Berkshires;  others  made  their  homes 
along  the  Mohawk  and  Schoharie  Valleys.  But 
most  of  them  landed  in  Philadelphia  and,  passing 
over  the  lands  of  the  Quakers  and  the  Germans, 
settled  sparsely  through  the  Alleghanies,  but  closely 
in  Pittsburg  and  vicinity.  From  Pennsylvania 
they  spread  rapidly  through  the  piedmont  and 
southern  valleys,  soon  outnumbering  the  Ger 
mans,  whom  they  generally  flanked  to  the  west, 
and  at  times,  in  the  Carolinas,  the  English. 
Though  the  majority  came  in  thus  by  the  "back 
door"  of  these  southern  colonies,  another  stream 
of  this  same  immigration  ran  from  Charleston 


into  the  hill  cou.ntry.  "In  1700  the  foreign 
population  in  the  colonies  was  slight;  in  1775 
it  is  calculated  that  225,000  Germans  and  385,000 
Scotch-Irish,  together  nearly  one-fifth  of  the  en 
tire  population,  lived  within  the  provinces  that 
won  independence." 

There  were  other  groups  that  helped  to  vary  the 
blood  of  English  America.  The  Welsh  settled  on 
the  "Welsh  Barony"  of  40,000  acres  just  west  of 
Philadelphia,  where  the  names  of  modern  suburbs 
attest  their  origin,  such  as  Merion  (once  Merioneth 
Town),  Radnor  and  Haverford  (Map  10),  and, 
near  by,  Bryn  Mawr,  Bala,  Ardmore,  Wynne- 
wood,  Narberth,  Cymwyd,  Pencoyd,  etc.  Swiss 
sectaries  found  a  home  in  New  Berne,  North 
Carolina  (Map  16),  and  Jews  expelled  from 
Portugal  and  Spain  especially  in  New  York 
City  and  Rhode  Island.  Catholic  Irish  in  small 
numbers  scattered  themselves  throughout  the 
colonies. 

Oftentimes  succeeding  waves  of  immigration 
left  population  seemingly  in  strata,  as  in  New 
York.  Here  are  Indian  names,  like  Ontario, 
Oswego,  Oneida,  etc.;  Dutch  names,  like  Sche- 
nectady,  Cohoes,  and  Spuyten  Duyvil;  German 
names,  like  German  Flats  and  Palatine;  French 
names  like  those  of  the  northern  rivers,  Racquette, 
DeGrasse,  and  St.  Regis,  or  of  the  Huguenot  town, 
New  Rochelle;  the  names  of  English  towns  or  of 
pioneers,  and  later,  in  the  national  period,  those 
of  American  statesmen.  But  place  names  in  a 
new  country,  rapidly  settled,  will  not,  as  a  whole, 
mean  as  much  as  in  Europe.  A  glance  at  the  map 
suffices  to  show  the  resort  to  artificiality  in  the 
wholesale  naming  of  townships.  The  classics  and 
the  capitals  of  the  world  were  called  upon  to  furnish 
names  in  great  numbers. 

The  desire  to  worship  God  in  some  way  that 
chanced  to  violate  the  mandate  of  the  state  Church 
was  undoubtedly  a  powerful  motive  in  the  minds  of 
many  emigrants  to  America.  New  Englanders, 
however,  objected  not  to  the  principle  of  an  estab 
lishment,  but  only  to  the  errors  which  they  thought 
distinguished  that  in  England;  consequently,  in 
all  their  colonies,  except  Rhode  Island,  taxes  were 
collected  for  the  Puritan-Congregational  Church 
until  the  nineteenth  century.  In  the  South,  Vir- 


132 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


ginia  and  the  Carolinas  maintained  the  Anglican 
or  Episcopal  Church  with  public  money  from  the 
beginning  until  the  Revolution,  although  in  North 
Carolina  there  was  but  one  settled  minister  till 
after  1721,  and  the  law  was  enforced  hardly  at  all, 
because  of  the  overwhelming  proportion  of  dis 
senters.  The  situation  was  similar  in  Georgia; 
though  grants  were  made  for  religion  at  the  foun 
dation  of  the  colony,  there  was  really  no  state 
Church  until  1758,  about  five  years  after  it  had 
become  a  royal  province,  and  by  1769,  shortly 
before  it  succumbed  in  the  Revolution,  there  were 
but  two  churches  in  the  establishment.  The  fol 
lowing  extract  describes  the  situation  in  Mary 
land:  "The  first  assembly  convened  by  the  royal 
government  passed  the  act,  in  the  year  1692,  for 
the  establishment  in  Maryland  of  the  Church  of 
England.  .  .  .  [After  some  time]  Doctor  Bray's  bill 
became  a  law  in  the  year  1701-02,  and  with  but 
few  amendments  it  remained  in  force  until  the 
Revolution  of  1776."  1  The  arrangement  in  New 
York  (Map  lla)  was  embodied  in  "The  Ministry 
Act,  1693:  'An  Act  for  settling  a  ministry  and 
raising  a  maintenance  for  them  in  the  City  of 
New  York,  County  of  Richmond,  Westchester, 
and  Queens  County.  Passed  September  22,  1693 
(Chapter  33). "2  But  the  act  specified  merely  that 
a  "good  sufficient  Protestant  Minister"  was  to 
officiate  in  each  parish,  and  it  was  never  agreed 
that  this  excluded  others  than  Anglicans.  A  stiff 
contest  was  fought  by  Presbyterians  at  Jamaica 
(Map  9)  to  wrest  control  of  their  church  property 
away  from  the  governor's  clergyman.  In  New 
Jersey  a  weak  claim  was  made  that  the  Anglican 
Church  was  established,  because  it  came  under 
the  same  governor  as  New  York,  and  under  the 
law  whose  ambiguous  phrasing  we  have  just 
remarked. 

Sectarian  enthusiasm  was  responsible  for  the 
foundation  of  all  the  colonial  colleges  but  one,  the 
College  of  Philadelphia,  now  the  University  of 

1  N.  D.  Mereness,  Maryland  as  a  Proprietary  Province  (New 
York,  1901),  pp.  437-439.' 

-  Ecclesiastical  Records  of  the  State  of  New  York  (Albany,  1901), 
vol.  ii,  pp.  1076-1079.  Queens  County  included  modern  Kings. 


Pennsylvania.  They  can  be  located,  with  dates, 
from  the  following  table:1 

Institution  Place  Sect  Dale 

Harvard  College  Cambridge,  Mass.  Puritan  1636 

William  and  Mary  College  Williamsburg,  Va.  Anglican  1693 
Yale  College  New  Haven,  Conn.  Puritan  1700 

Nassau  Hall  (Princeton)  Princeton,  N.  J.  Presbyterian  1746 
College  of  Philadelphia 

(U.  of  P.)  Philadelphia  1749 

Kings  College  (Columbia)  New  York,  N.  Y.  Anglican  1754 
Rhode  Island  College 

(Brown)  Providence,  R.  I.  Baptist  1764 

Queens  College  (Rutgers)  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.  Reformed  1766 
Dartmouth  College  Hanover,  N.  H.  Puritan  1769 

From  your  reading,  especially  from  C.  M. 
Andrews's  Colonial  Self-government,  Chapter  XVIII, 
show  what  towns  had  become  important  com 
mercial  ports  early  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
and  indicate  within  parentheses  the  names  of  any 
said  already  to  have  declined.  It  is  interesting  to 
reflect  upon  the  causes  of  the  lessened  importance 
now  of  Salem  (Map  34),  for  example,  which  once  led 
the  shipping  of  English  America;  or  Providence, 
which  at  one  time  far  surpassed  New  York.  The  ex 
tent  of  settlement  of  the  hinterland,  and  the  facilities 
of  communication,  of  ten  changed  the  trend  of  trade. 
One  reason  why  Boston  developed  as  a  port,  more 
than  the  coast  cities  of  the  South,  was  that  it  was 
nine  degrees  of  longitude  nearer  to  England.  What 
city  is  not  mentioned  in  Professor  Andrews's  book 
dealing  with  the  seventeenth  century,  which  became 
one  of  America's  chief  ports  by  1776? 

Mark  with  initial  letters  localities  which  pro 
duced  tobacco,  indigo,  naval  stores,  rum,  rice,  hats, 
ships,  wool,  fish,  and  iron  goods. 

1  Place  names  can  be  found  on  Maps  9,  14,  18c,  34.  For 
Washington  College,  now  Washington  and  Lee  University,  the 
year  1749  is  sometimes  claimed  as  the  date  of  foundation  on 
the  ground  of  continuation  from  an  academy  founded  in  Augusta 
County,  Virginia,  in  that  year.  It  did  not  become  a  college  until 
1813.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  collegiate  movement  had  as 
yet  made  little  headway  in  the  South.  DeBow,  the  Southern 
economist,  estimated  that  one-third  of  the  white  people  of  the 
country  in  1775  lived  south  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  (Map 
38).  The  United  States  Census  Bureau,  omitting  the  figures  of 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  estimates  the  attendance  in 
the  colleges  north  of  the  line  as  687,  that  of  those  south,  30; 
see  A  Century  of  Population  Growth  (Washington,  1909),  p. 
32.  We  shall  see  a  situation  quite  changed  in  our  survey  of 
the  "Plantation  Empire." 


MAP   STUDY    No.  10 
LATIN  OR  SAXON?    THE  HUNDRED  YEARS'  WAR 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  112-130;    Tyler,  England  in  America,  pp.  284-291;    Greene,  Provincial  America, 

119-165;    Thwaites,  France  in  America,  72-280. 
MAPS:  North  America;   Eastern  United  States  (2). 


IN  the  first  decade  of  the  seventeenth  century 
two  rival  European  peoples  set  up  outposts 
on  the  edge  of  a  vast  new  continent  of  incomputable 
size  and  wealth,  and  feebly  held  by  savages.  By 
the  end  of  the  century  these  colonies  had  grown 
sufficiently  to  annoy  each  other,  so  that  their 
second  hundred  years  was  mostly  spent  in  conflict, 
though  unsteady  and  often  purely  local.  They 
competed  for  the  fur  trade,  urged  on  the  savages 
to  massacre  frontiersmen,  took  advantage  of  the 
wars  in  Europe  to  harass  each  other's  commerce, 
till,  with  the  growth  of  population,  they  looked 
out  toward  the  great  West,  and  it  was  realized  in 
European  capitals,  by  those  who  knew,  that  a 
final  struggle  must  be  fought.  What  stock  would 
come  to  rule  the  continent  of  North  America,  which 
could  sustain  as  great  and  highly  civilized  a  popu 
lation  as  that  of  all  Europe?  Would  it  be  Latin 
or  Anglo-Saxon?  This  question  and  its  settlement 
have  an  important  place  in  the  history  of  the 
world. 

On  the  outline  map  should  be  shown  the  Euro 
pean  claims,  occupation,  and  settlement  in  1689 
(Map  12),  although  it  should  be  remembered,  as 
the  English  frontier  line  is  drawn,  that  the  200,00(T 
settlers  comprised  within  were  chiefly  concentrated 
very  near  the  coast  in  thirteen  different  colonies, 
more  or  less  self-governing  and  somewhat  jealous 
of  one  another.  While  the  Appalachian  highland 
set  a  bound  to  English  territorial  growth,  the  north 
ern  waterways  gave  the  French  easy  access  to 
the  West  and  encouraged  a  settlement  far-reaching, 
but  scattered  and  thin.  The  French  area  in  1689, 
impressive  as  it  is  on  our  map,  contained  less  than 
a  tenth  as  many  people  as  the  English.  But  they 
showed  a  larger  proportion  of  adult  men,  they 
were  under  a  single  autocratic  government,  and, 


with  one  important  exception,  stood  on  better 
terms  with  the  Indians. 

The  Iroquois  (Map  Study  No.  7)  were  useful 
to  the  French  holding  back  the  English  settlement 
from  the  western  river  valleys,  but  after  the  Church 
and  the  eastern  traders  had  forced  Frontenac's 
recall  in  1682,  these  Indians  sallied  almost  un 
opposed  into  Canada  and  massacred  the  village 
at  La  Chine,  near  Montreal.  Frontenac,  now  sent 
back,  determined  to  impress  the  savages  and 
thereby  control  the  Hudson-Mohawk  route  to  the 
West,  as  well  as  those  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  the 
Mississippi.  In  the  winter  of  1690  he  formed  war 
parties  at  Montreal,  Three  Rivers,  and  Quebec, 
and  struck  at  Schenectady,  Salmon  Falls  on  the 
Piscataqua  (Map  9),  and  Casco  (later  known  as 
Falmouth;  Map  14).  In  return  the  same  year 
New  England  sent  out  forces  which  took  Port  Royal 
in  Acadia  (Map  12) ;  then  representatives  of  Massa 
chusetts,  Connecticut,  and  Plymouth  co-operated 
with  New  York,  which  was  to  furnish  half  the 
troops  in  an  expedition  against  Montreal,  but,  the 
Iroquois  failing  to  support,  most  of  this  expedition 
was  abandoned  at  Lake  George  (Map  1  la) .  Massa 
chusetts  was  so  encouraged  by  the  Acadian  ven 
tures  that  it  sent  out  a  fleet  under  Sir  W7illiam 
Phips  to  take  Quebec.  Sir  William,  on  arriving 
at  the  French  fortress,  let  slip  his  opportunity 
through  delay,  and  returned  without  success.  After 
these  activities  of  1690,  hostilities  lapsed  into  a 
petite  guerre  along  the  frontier  until  the  indecisive 
Peace  of  Ryswick  was  announced. 

The  second  period  of  formal  struggle  began  in 
1702,  but  for  the  next  seven  years  consisted  chiefly 
in  border  forays  in  northern  New  England,  of 
which  the  famous  raid  at  Deerfield  (Map  14),  in 
1704,  may  serve  as  an  example.  In  that  year 


134 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


and  in  1707  there  were  two  unsuccessful  attempts 
to  retake  Port  Royal,  which  had  been  returned  to 
France  in  1697.  Colonial  agents  now  interested 
the  mother  country  in  an  expedition,  and  sufficient 
naval  aid  was  given  to  make  possible  this  capture 
of  the  Acadian  town,  which  now  became  Annapolis 
and  has  remained  English  to  the  present  day.  The 
following  year  Massachusetts  co-operated  with  an 
English  fleet  and  army  in  another  attempt  against 
the  famous  fortress  on  the  St.  Lawrence,  while  a 
land  expedition  supported  by  the  middle  colonies, 
Connecticut,  and  the  Iroquois  was  planned  against 
Montreal  by  the  former  route  selected,  up  the 
Hudson,  along  the  waters  of  Lake  George  and  Lake 
Champlain,  and  down  the  Richelieu.  The  failure 
of  the  former  through  the  cowardice  and  stupidity 
of  the  English  leaders,  after  they  had  sailed  into 
the  mouth  of  the  great  river,  entailed  the  abandon 
ment  of  the  latter,  which  consisted  of  some  2,300 
men,  before  it  passed  the  head  of  Lake  Champlain. 


citizens  drove  off  the  invaders  and,  indeed,  made 
many  French  and  Spanish  prisoners. 

The  Spanish  again  raided  the  Edisto  region  in 
1727,  continuing  to  urge  the  Yemassees  against 
the  English,  as  they  had  in  1715  (Map  Study  No. 
8).  Likewise,  it  was  before  the  "War  of  Jenkins's 
Ear"  had  been  announced  in  America  that  the 
Spaniards  attacked  the  English  on  Amelia  Island 
(Map  28).  The  safety  of  the  southern  frontier 
now  rested  with  the  buffer  colony  of  Georgia  and 
its  organizer,  General  Oglethorpe.  In  November, 
1739,  he  directed  an  attack  by  land  and  sea  on 
the  capital  of  the  Spanish  province,  which  was  a 
complete  failure.  But  when  the  Spanish  governor, 
in  1642,  sailed  against  him,  he  won  a  small  naval 
victory  near  Fort  William,  and  shortly  afterward 
by  an  ingenious  ruse  scared  away  5,000  men  moving 
on  Frederica  (Map  lib). 

Meanwhile,  in  the  period  of  truce  that  followed 
the  Peace  of  Utrecht,  the  French  and  English 


There  soon  followed  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht  (Map^  continued  their  diplomatic  contest  for  the  Iroquois 


14),  whose  American  arrangements  should  be  in 
dicated  on  the  second  map. 

That  the  fighting  in  America  had  but  a  loose 
connection  with  that  in  Europe  is  illustrated  by 
the  fact  that  Spanish  ships,  using  St.  Augustine 
as  a  base,  had  raided  the  Carolina  settlements  on 
the  Edisto  (Map  7b)  and  the  Scotch  colony  near 
Beaufort  (Map  lib),  and  that,  before  the  War  of 
the  Spanish  Succession  had  been  declared,  the 
governor  of  Florida  had  planned  to  drive  the 
English  from  the  whole  disputed  district  (Map  12). 
The  Carolinians,  being  warned,  beat  off  their  foes 
in  a  battle  on  the  Flint  (Map  lib)  and  this  success 
encouraged  them  to  attack  St.  Augustine,  in  1702, 
by  expeditions  on  land  and  sea.  But  though  the 
town  itself  was  destroyed,  they  could  not  muster 
enough  artillery  to  smash  down  the  fort,  and  re 
turned  with  little  of  significance  accomplished. 
In  1703,  to  atone  for  this  disappointment,  the 
English  made  their  way  in  force  from  Charleston 
through  the  woods  to  some  fortified  settlements 
about  eighty  miles  northwest  of  St.  Augustine,  and 
destroyed  them.  The  Spaniards  of  St.  Augustine 
retaliated  three  years  later  by  joining  with  a 
French  fleet  from  Martinique  in  an  attack  on 
Charleston;  but,  though  wasted  by  disease,  the 


support.  The  former,  to  bar  one  door  to  the  West 
and  to  strengthen  their  prestige  among  the  Senecas, 
set  up  a  new  fort  at  Niagara  in  1721  (Map  13), 
while  Burnet,  the  enterprising  governor  of  New 
York,  in  1726,  fortified  the  trading  post  at  Oswego, 
lying,  as  the  map  demonstrates,  within  the  region 
claimed  by  France  and  commanding  the  Ontario- 
Mohawk  route  from  Fort  Frontenac  to  the  Eng 
lish  settlements.  The  French  soon  answered  with 
Fort  Frederic  at  Crown  Point,  protecting  Mont 
real  and  menacing  New  York.  But  the  most  im 
portant  fortress  was  at  Louisburg,  begun  in  1720, 
at  the  little  fishing  town  of  Cape  Breton  Island 
(Map  14).  This,  second  only  to  Quebec  in  strength, 
was  especially  annoying  to  New  England  as  a 
base  for  privateers  and  for  raids  upon  cod  fisheries, 
almost  as  important  to  them  as  the  fur  trade  was 
to  Canada.  When,  in  1745,  the  European  War  of 
the  Austrian  Succession  had  made  regular  the 
fighting  in  America,  these  colonies  gathered  all 
their  strength  and,  aided  by  an  English  fleet,  set 
out  from  Boston.  They  retook  Canseau,  at  the 
eastern  point  of  Nova  Scotia,  whose  seizure  by 
the  French  had  been  the  immediate  provocation 
of  their  enterprise,  and  then  sailed  on  to  Louis- 
burg  itself,  which,  after  a  siege,  to  everyone's 


133 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


astonishment,  they  captured.  But  their  satisfac 
tion  was  soon  marred  by  the  restoration  of  the 
fortresses  in  the  Treaty  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  1748. 

Our  maps  have  indicated  the  disputed  claims 
as  to  the  land  beyond  the  Alleghanies  (Maps 
12  and  14).  Those  of  the  English  were  restated 
from  the  early  charters,  Virginia's  of  1609  being 
most  inclusive  (Map  Study  No.  5);  the  French 
claims,  based  on  exploration,  were  not  so  valid 
for  the  upper  Ohio  country  as  for  the  region 
farther  west  (Map  Study  No.  4).  By  the  middle 
of  the  eighteenth  century  English  traders  had 
penetrated  to  such  Indian  settlements  as  Logs- 
town,  seventeen  miles  down  the  Ohio  River; 
Pickawillany,  on  the  upper  waters  of  the  Miami, 
near  the  site  of  modern  Pi  qua  (Map  28b),  and 
Sandusky  on  Lake  Erie  (Map  16);  and  by  under 
selling  their  rivals  they  acquired  some  prestige. 
But  the  French  with  their  single  energetic  govern 
ment  in  Quebec,  actively  imperialistic  and  un 
checked  by  any  popular  assembly,  were  better 
fitted  to  strike  for  this  fair  country  of  woods  and 
rolling  prairies.  They  had  but  60,000  people, 
while  the  English  numbered  over  1,500,000;  but, 
as  we  have  observed,  they  were  60,000  servants 
of  the  French  Empire,  and  more  effective  than  the 
vastly  greater  population  of  democratic  home 
builders,  concerned  with  local  liberties.  They  had 
established  soldiers,  priests,  and  traders  at  ports 
such  as  Detroit  (Map  14),  which,  founded  a  half 
century  before,  had  lately  come  to  boast  a  thousand 
whites;  Fort  Miami,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Maumee 
(Map  15b);  Vincennes,  in  1735;  and  Fort  Ouiata- 
non,  in  1719,  on  the  Wabash.  The  valley  of  the 
Ohio  demanded  attention.  "If  the  English  should 
seize  it,"  says  Parkman,1  "they  would  sever  the 
chain  of  posts  and  cut  French  America  asunder. 
If  the  French  held  it  and  intruded  themselves 
along  its  eastern  limits  they  would  shut  their  rivals 
between  the  Alleghanies  and  the  sea,  control  all 
the  tribes  of  the  West,  and  turn  them,  in  case  of 
war,  against  the  English  borders — a  frightful  and 
unsupportable  scourge." 

In  1749  the  French  governor  sent  Celeron  de 
Bienville  to  take  possession  of  the  region  by  bury- 
ing  engraved  lead  plates  at  the  confluence  of 

1  Montcalm  and  Wolfe  (Boston,  1884),  vol.  i,  p.  40. 


streams  and  nailing  sheets  of  tin,  emblazoned  with 
the  royal  arms,  to  trees  conspicuously  situated 
He  landed  near  the  site  of  modern  Westfield  on 
Lake  Erie,  made  his  way  eight  miles  over  a  ridge 
to  Lake  Chautauqua  (Map  13),  and  thence  by  its 
outlet  to  the  Allegheny,  considered  by  the  French 
as  part  of  the  Ohio,  which  they  called  La  Belle 
Riviere.1  Along  this  stream  he  proceeded  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Great  Miami  (Map  29b),  up  which 
he  went,  and,  crossing  to  the  Maumee,  returned 
to  Lake  Erie.  Occupation  followed.  The  land 
ing  for  the  Chautauqua  portage  was  rocky  and 
difficult,  and  the  next  expedition  found  a  better 
route  from  Presq*  Isle,  now  Erie  (Map  15b),  to 
French  Creek  (Map  13),  twenty-one  miles  away, 
where  Fort  Le  Bceuf  was  built,  in  1753,  on  the 
site  of  modern  Waterford.  At  the  juncture  of 
French  Creek  and  the  Allegheny,  the  following 
year  Fort  Venango  (now  Franklin)  was  set  up. 
Forts  Toronto  and  La  Presentation  had  already 
been  built,  in  1749,  to  hold  the  Indians  about  Lake 
Ontario.  It  was  clear  that  they  soon  would  occupy 
the  strategic  point  at  which  the  Allegheny  joined 
the  Monongahela  to  form  the  Ohio. 

Meanwhile  the  English  had  not  been  entirely 
idle.  Their  method  of  expansion  was  not  by  forts 
and  mission  stations,  or  by  lead  plates  and  stand 
ards,  but  by  actual  settlement  on  the  soil;  and 
in  1749  two  land  companies  were  formed  of  Eng 
lishmen  and  colonists.  The  Ohio  Company,  made 
up  mostly  of  Virginians,  obtained  a  grant  of  500,000 
acres  on  the  river  between  the  Monongahela  and 
the  Great  Kanawha  (Map  17),  on  consideration 
that  they  settle  seven  hundred  families  within 
fourteen  years.  Pennsylvania,  determining  to  cir 
cumvent  their  southern  neighbors,  filed  rival  peti 
tions  and  organized  rival  expeditions.  Reference 
to  Map  Study  No.  7  will  recall  that  the  land  about 
the  headwaters  of  the  Ohio  was  claimed  by  both 
these  colonies.  The  companies  sent  competing 
agents  into  the  West,  and  the  Indians,  believing 
tales  of  each  against  the  other,  came  to  give  even 
more  confidence  to  the  French. 

Several  of  the  Virginia  governors  had  considered 


1  The  French  name  for  this  stream,  La  Riviere  aux  Boeufs, 
or  the  River  of  Buffaloes,  reminds  us  that  the  bison  at  that 
time  ranged  aa  far  east  as  parts  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania. 


136 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


making  good  the  western  claims  of  that  province; 
in  1716  Governor  Spotswood  had  said,  "We  should 
attempt  to  make  some  settlements  on  ye  lakes,  and 
at  the  same  time  possess  ourselves  of  those  passes 
of  the  great  mountains  which  are  necessary  to 
preserve  a  communication  with  such  settlements." 
It  was  Governor  Dinwiddie  who,  in  1753,  sent  young 
Major  Washington,  then  twenty-one  years  old,  to 
warn  off  the  French.  Starting  from  Will's  Creek, 
or  Cumberland  (Map  15b),  which  the  Ohio 
Company  had  made  a  trading  base,  he  passed 
through  the  ridges  and  intervening  meadows  of 
the  Alleghanies  to  the  Monongahela  (Map  17), 
and  the  Ohio  to  Logstown.  Thence  he  went  across 
the  country  to  Venango  where  some  French  officers 
were  spending  the  winter  preparing  the  materials 
for  a  fort,  and  then  to  Fort  Le  Bceuf,  hearing 
nothing  but  the  boasts  of  the  widening  dominion 
of  the  French.  The  following  year,  after  he  had 
reported,  he  was  sent  with  a  small  command  to 
take  charge  of  a  fort  at  the  forks  of  the  Ohio, 
which  the  Ohio  Company  had  begun.  At  Will's 
Creek  he  learned  that  the  French  had  been  before 
him  and  built  Fort  Duquesne,  but,  pressing  on,  he 
fought  a  victorious  skirmish  with  a  party  of  the 
enemy  just  beyond  the  mountains.  He  then  erected 
Fort  Necessity  (Map  15b)  at  this  place;  but  here, 
on  July  4th,  he  was  attacked  and  beaten  by  a 
superior  force. 

Dinwiddie's  pleas  brought  an  English  force  to 
America  under  Gen.  Edward  Braddock,  who  was 
to  take  the  "offensive  defensive";  and  at  a  con 
ference  of  governors  at  Alexandria  (Map  30),  a 
plan  was  unfolded.  Besides  Oswego,  which  the 
British  had  held  since  1726,  the  four  gates  to 
Canada  were  to  be  secured.  That  to  the  Ohio 
Valley,  at  Fort  Duquesne,  Braddock  was  himself 
to  take.  Governor  Shirley  was  to  strengthen  the 
fort  at  Oswego,  and  then  move  on  Niagara.  Col. 
William  Johnson,  the  New  York  Indian  Agent,  was 
to  take  Crown  Point.  Lt.-Col.  Robert  Monckton 
was  to  drive  the  enemy  from  Fort  Beausejour  on 
the  northern  arm  of  the  Bay  of  Fundy  (Map  16), 
which  may  be  indicated  on  the  continental  map. 
These  key  points  were  all  on  ground  claimed  by 
the  English;  but  French  occupation  had  weakened 
*he  claim. 


In  early  summer  Braddock  led  out  the  first 
British  military  command  that  ever  penetrated 
a  wilderness,  followed  close  to  Washington's  former 
route,  and  fell  at  Fort  Duquesne  before  the  ex 
perienced  French  bushfighters  leading  the  American 
red  men,  the  most  formidable  forest  warriors  the 
world  had  ever  seen.  The  frontier  was  terror- 
stricken  by  this  tragedy,  and  many  rude  stockades 
were  built  along  the  eastern  mountains  in  Vir 
ginia,  Maryland,  and  Pennsylvania. 

Shirley's  and  Johnson's  men  rendezvoused  at 
Albany.  The  Indian  leader  took  about  two 
thousand  farmers  and  Mohawks  to  the  shores  of 
Lac  St.  Sacrement,  which,  with  the  instinct  of  a 
courtier,  he  renamed  Lake  George,  and  there  at  a 
fortified  position  in  a  wooded  swamp,  called  Fort 
William  Henry,  after  one  of  the  king's  grandsons, 
he  beat  off  a  French  force  that  had  come  from 
Montreal.  Shirley  cut  his  way  to  Oswego  with 
three  regiments  of  colonials,  but,  because  of  diffi 
culties  in  transportation  through  the  wilderness, 
the  prospect  of  the  winter  storms,  and  the  present 
menace  of  the  French  across  the  lake,  his  forces 
got  no  farther,  and  dwindled  by  disease  to  a  small 
remnant. 

The  fourth  objective  of  this  quadrilateral  cam 
paign,  Fort  Beausejour,  lay  in  a  country  where  the 
French  inhabitants  annoyed  the  British  govern 
ment.1  Halifax  had  been  founded  a  half  dozen 
years  before,  and  four  thousand  colonists  brought 
from  England  as  a  counterpoise  to  Louisburg. 
But  the  old  French  settlers  made  known  their 
resentment  in  many  ways,  and,  though  professedly 
neutral,  aided  the  French  in  Fort  Beausejour, 
which  threatened  the  English  to  the  west.  Monck- 
ton's  force  made  its  way  from  Boston,  easily  cap 
tured  this  clumsy  work,  and  renamed  it  Fort 
Cumberland,  after  the  king's  brother.  They  had 
isolated  Louisburg;  but  the  ruling  power  was  not 
patient.  The  habitants,  who  refused  to  be  subordi 
nate  to  the  British,  especially  in  Grand  Pre  (Map 
14),  were  now  deported  to  the  number  of  six  thou 
sand,  and  allowed  to  find  their  way,  possibly  to  Cape 
Breton  Island,  or,  like  Evangeline,  to  Louisiana. 


1  The  boundaries  of  the  land  transferred  in  1713  were  very 
vague  and  both  sides  claimed  what  is  now  New  Brunswick  and 
upper  Maine. 


137 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


England  and  France  declared  formal  war  in  the 
spring  of  1756;  we  have  seen  that  frontier  fighting 
was  regarded  as  somewhat  beyond  the  law  of  na 
tions,  and,  like  that  of  privateers,  continued  in 
times  of  peace.  Shirley  was  intrigued  out  of  the 
command  which  had  been  left  by  Braddock,  and 
his  successor,  the  Earl  of  Loudoun,  was  so  ineffec 
tive  that  the  new  French  leader,  Montcalm, 
crossed  from  Fort  Frontenac  to  what  is  now  called 
Sackett's  Harbor  (Map  28),  and,  dragging  his 
cannon  overland,  easily  took  Oswego.  The  fol 
lowing  year,  with  French  regulars,  Canadian  mili 
tiamen,  and  a  heterogeneous  force  of  Indians,  he 
came  up  the  Richelieu-Champlain  route  to  Crown 
Point  and  the  new  work  at  Ticonderoga,  and  then 
by  land  and  water  to  the  destruction  of  Fort 
William  Henry.  The  outpost  of  the.  English  now 
became  Fort  Edward  (Map  18a)  on  the  upper 
waters  of  the  Hudson,  which  Johnson  had  built 
two  years  before  to  control  this  much-disputed 
land.  This  frontier  region,  from  the  Mohawk  to 
Lake  George  and  Lake  Champlain,  saw  far  more 
drilling  and  fighting  from  1609  to  1778  than  any 
other  part  of  America. 

When  Pitt  came  to  power,  in  1757,  the  war 
ceased  to  be  a  struggle  for  certain  limited  rights 
and  places  in  the  world,  and  became  an  unlimited 
war  for  the  final  destruction  of  the  French  Empire, 
involving,  of  course,  its  complete  expulsion  from 
America.  First-class  generals  were  now  sent  to 
America;  Amherst  and  Wolfe,  and  Admiral  Bos- 
cawen,  in  1758,  took  the  "impregnable"  fortress 
of  Louisburg,  which  was  soon  afterward  destroyed 
and  disappeared  from  history.  Abercrombie  mis 
led  a  gallant  army  to  defeat  before  Ticonderoga, 
but  Col.  John  Bradstreet  somewhat  offset  this 
disgrace  by  taking  a  force  of  provincials  and  In 
dians  up  the  Mohawk  and  to  the  site  of  Os 
wego,  whence  he  crossed  the  lake,  captured  and 
destroyed  old  Fort  Frontenac  (Map  13),  and  all 
the  near-by  shipping,  thus  seizing  the  Ontario 
gateway  and  weakening  the  French  hold  on 
Niagara. 

The  Pennsylvania  frontier  had  suffered  through 
the  indifference  of  the  Quaker  Assembly,  but,  after 
sundry  losses,  Governor  Morris  had,  in  1756,  sent 
Col.  John  Armstrong  with  a  force  of  Scotch-Irish 


138 


borderers  to  demolish  a  nest  of  savages  on  the 
Allegheny,  between  Forts  Venango  and  Duquesne. 
His  success  explains  the  name  of  Armstrong 
County,  and  suggests  what  Pennsylvania  might 
have  done  had  its  government  been  active.  Now, 
in  1758,  General  Forbes,  with  twelve  hundred  High 
landers  and  many  militiamen,  struck  out  across 
the  mountains  to  Fort  Bedford  (Map  15b),  where 
he  was  joined  by  Washington,  who  had  led  a 
force  from  Cumberland.  The  army  now  pushed 
forward  by  way  of  Fort  Ligonier  to  Fort  Duquesne, 
where  a  victory  wiped  out  the  stain  of  Braddock's 
defeat  and,  in  the  words  of  Parkman,  "opened  the 
Great  West  to  English  enterprise,  took  from  France 
half  her  savage  allies,  and  relieved  the  western 
borders  of  the  scourge  of  Indian  war."  *  The  French 
were  now  distinctly  on  the  defensive. 

Pitt  had  planned  a  triple  attack  on  Canada, 
all  concentrating  on  Quebec.  Wolfe,  with  Admiral 
Saunders  in  support,  was  to  lead  up  the  St.  Law 
rence  a  command  composed  in  part  of  New  Eng- 
landers,  recruited  in  great  numbers  and  at  heavy 
cost  to  the  colonies;  Amherst,  with  a  larger  army, 
was  to  take  Ticonderoga  and  Crown  Point  and 
march  to  Montreal.  Colonel  Prideaux  was  to 
transport  about  5,000  men  from  Oswego  along 
Lake  Ontario  to  Fort  Niagara,  which  reduced, 
he  was  to  join  Amherst  and  move  with  him  to 
merge  all  forces  in  a  final  stroke  against  the  citadel 
of  New  France.  Prideaux's  errand  was  accom 
plished  and  Amherst  was  successful,  but  the  Lake 
Champlain  campaign  consumed  so  much  time  that 
Wolfe  was  forced  to  act  alone.  The  British  navy 
had  so  closed  the  sea  to  reinforcement  and  sup 
ply  that  the  town  was  in  hard  straits,  and  on 
September  13,  1759,  the  French  succumbed  upon 
the  Plains  of  Abraham,  just  west  of  Quebec. 
Canada  had  fallen,  though  the  French  attempted 
the  following  year  to  retake  their  city,  till  driven 
off  by  English  ships.  In  September,  1760,  General 
Amherst,  commanding  17,000  men,  took  the  last 
stronghold,  Montreal,  and  a  general  capitulation 
was  concluded.  The  final  arrangement  can  be 
indicated  on  the  map  (Map  16). 

The  frontiersmen  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania 
were  not  the  only  ones  who  saw  the  reddened 

1  Montcdm  and  Wolfe,  vol.  ii,  p.  162. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


tomahawk.  The  Cherokees,  in  1759,  proved  un 
reliable  allies  of  England,  and,  believing  they  had 
grievances,  went  on  the  warpath  along  the  Carolina 
border.  To  provide  against  such  a  possibility,  the 
governor  of  South  Carolina  had  built  Fort  Prince 
George  in  what  is  now  the  western  corner  of  the 
state,  and  Fort  Loudoun  (Map  15b)  was  likewise 
soon  erected  on  the  Little  Tennessee.  Partisan 
warfare,  with  cruel  attacks  and  reprisals,  waged 
through  this  country  for  two  years,  training  sol 
diers  who  were  to  lead  similar  bands  against  the 
British  twenty  years  later.  Several  expeditions, 
including  regulars  and  provincials  from  Virginia 
and  North  Carolina,  made  war  from  a  base  on  the 
Congarees,  near  modern  Columbia  (Map  59a), 
and  finally  Colonel  Grant,  furnished  by  Amherst 
with  a  force  of  Highlanders  and  colonists  and  with 
Chickasaw  and  Creek  allies,  freed  the  back  settle 
ments  of  the  Cherokee  menace. 

A  far  more  serious  Indian  war  was  that  organized 
by  a  chief  of  the  Ottawas,  an  Algonquian  tribe. 
When,  after  the  capitulation  of  1760,  Maj.  Robert 
Rogers  with  his  two  hundred  rangers,  on  his  way 
west  to  receive  the  French  posts,  put  in  at  the 
mouth  of  Cuyahoga,  now  Cleveland  (Map  28), 
he  was  met  by  this  savage  leader,  demanding  that 
this  intrusion  be  explained.  Rogers  seemed  to  sat 
isfy  him  arid  went  on  to  take  possession  of  Detroit, 
Forts  Miami  and  Ouiatanon  (Map  13),  and,  the 


following  year,  the  forts  at  Michillimackinac, 
Sault  Ste.  Marie,  Green  Bay,  and  St.  Joseph. 
But  cautiously  and  thoroughly  Pontiac  was  en 
listing  all  the  western  tribes  into  a  conspiracy, 
preaching  with  the  fervor  of  a  prophet  and  plan 
ning  with  the  skill  of  an  accomplished  strategist. 
Parkman  has  described  his  secret  service,  his 
smooth  and  treacherous  professions,  and  his  cr.el 
thoroughness;  we  need  here  only  to  notice  that  in 
1763  Forts  Sandusky  (Map  15b),  St.  Joseph, 
Miami,  Ouiatanon,  Le  Bceuf,  Venango,  and  Presq* 
Isle,  and  the  forts  at  Bedford  and  Carlisle,  Penn 
sylvania  (Map  34),  fell  into  the  Indians'  hands. 
Detroit  and  Fort  Ligonier  (Map  15b)  succeeded 
hi  holding  out  till  help  arrived.  Bradstreet's 
journey  to  relieve  the  former  is  recorded  in  our 
map,  and  also  that  of  Col.  Henry  Bouquet,  who, 
with  a  small  force,  raised  the  siege  of  Fort  Ligonier, 
fought  the  famous  battle  of  Bushy  Run,  and  saved 
the  garrison  at  Fort  Pitt.  These  victories  sealed 
the  fate  of  Pontiac's  conspiracy,  and  the  following 
year  Bouquet  went  on  to  the  Muskingum  country 
to  receive  the  submission  of  the  tribes  and  200 
captives  whom  the  Indians  had  taken.  There 
after  there  was  no  important  frontier  fighting 
until  the  Revolution,  except  that  which  Lord 
Dunmore,  the  governor  of  Virginia,  carried  on 
in  1774,  against  the  Cherokees  along  the  Great 
Kanawha  River. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  11 
AMERICANS  FOR  AMERICA:    FROM  IRRITATION  TO  INDEPENDENCE 

TEXT:   Bassett,  pp.  130-132,  161-181;   Howard,  Preliminaries  of  the  Revolution;  Van  Tyne,  American 

Revolution,  pp.  3-49. 
MAPS:  The  World;    Eastern  United  States. 


DURING  the  ten  years  of  war  in  America 
begun  at  Fort  Necessity  and  ended  at  Bushy 
Run,  the  population  grew  larger  by  a  third,  ac 
cording  to  the  customary  rate  of  increase  for  a 
century  past,  and  in  1763  stood  above  one  and  three- 
quarter  millions.  Contemplating  their  huge  war 


debt,  the  Ministers  at  home  listened  with  interest 
to  the  tales  of  British  soldiers  and  officials  as  to 
how  the  colonies  had  prospered,  and  resolved  to 
impress  them  with  a  sense  of  imperial  obligation. 
Let  us  imagine  ourselves  seated  beside  the  hard 
working  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  George 


139 


Grenville,  in  the  winter  of  1764,  with  a  map  of 
the  world  spread  out  before  us.  On  the  American 
continent  we  indicate  the  territorial  settlement  of 
the  year  before,  reflecting  upon  its  possible  conse 
quences  as  we  extend  England's  color  north  across 
the  Lakes  and  the  St.  Lawrence.  Possibly  Gren 
ville  has  heard  comments  like  that  of  Vergennes, 
the  French  diplomat,  that  he  was  "persuaded 
England  would  ere  long  repent  of  having  removed 
the  only  check  that  could  keep  her  colonies  in 
awe."  He  formulates  a  plan  to  maintain  soldiers 
in  America,  to  be  supported  by  a  stamp  tax,  not 
only  for  protection  against  the  Indians,  but  against 
a  possible  return  of  the  French.  Grenville  is 
vaguely  aware  that  the  region  beyond  the  Alle- 
ghanies  has  some  possibilities,  for  he  has,  no  doubt, 
heard  of  the  proposal,  made  by  some  speculators 
the  previous  autumn,  to  erect  a  colony  of  great 
area  along  the  Mississippi,  to  be  known  as  Char- 
lotiana  (Map  17),  and  of  the  petition  of  Colonel 
Washington  and  others  for  a  Mississippi  Com 
pany  to  settle  the  land  about  the  mouth  of  the 
Ohio,  and  of  the  plan  of  New  York  business 
men  to  develop  a  region  overlapping  both  the 
others. 

But  the  Ministry  desires  to  quiet  the  fears 
of  the  Indians,  who  are  reported  to  be  on  the 
warpath  (Map  Study  No.  10)  to  protect  their 
hunting  grounds  from  English  settlement.  On 
this  account  the  Ministers  have  issued,  in  Oc 
tober,  1763,  a  proclamation  closing  to  all  white 
men,  excepting  licensed  traders,  "for  the  pres 
ent"  all  land  "beyond  the  heads  or  sources  of 
any  of  the  rivers  which  fall  into  the  Atlantic 
Ocean  from  the  west  or  northwest."  They 
originally  expected  by  careful  surveying  to  re 
serve  the  southern  Ohio  country,  but  the  fierce 
ness  with  which  Pontiac  has  made  war  has  led 
them  to  select  a  well-marked  natural  bound 
ary,  and  we  can  easily  trace  the  line  from 
Chaleurs  Bay  to'.the  St.  Marys  River  (Map  16). 
The  proclamation,  as  if  in  compensation,  mentions 
the  advantages,  including  the  protection  of  English 
law,  which  settlers  may  enjoy  in  Nova  Scotia, 
the  two  Floridas,  and  Quebec.  But  the  inclusion 
of  the  last  among  those  coming  under  the  legal 
system,  some  may  be  wise  enough  to  see,  will  have 


to  be  corrected  later.1  Perhaps  the  Chancellor 
notices  that  no  provision  has  been  made  for  govern 
ing  the  old  French  settlements  along  the  Mississippi 
and  the  Wabash.  Georgia,  now  beginning  rapidly 
to  grow  in  population,  has  been  extended  by  the 
line  to  the  St.  Marys,  yet  probably  Grenville 
knows  that  this  southernmost  colony  of  the  old 
thirteen  has  determined  to  claim  all  west  to  the 
Mississippi  from  the  sources  of  the  Savannah  and 
St.  Marys.2 

But  the  Chancellor's  mind  is  not  chiefly  occupied 
with  the  subject  of  boundaries,  but  with  that  of 
revenue.  If  on  our  map  we  indicate  the  region 
north  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  (Map  37)  as 
"farm  colonies,"  and  that  to  the  south  as  "plan 
tation  colonies,"  we  represent  Grenville's  opinion 
of  them  respectively  as  "useless"  and  "useful" 
as  far  as  English  customs  and  trade  are  concerned. 
He  thinks  much  of  the  trade  of  New  England  and 
we  can  easily  show  with  lines  upon  the  map  the 
course  of  his  concern.  Ships  laden  with  staves, 
lumber,  and  provisions  put  out  from  these  towns — 
for  example,  Newport — to  Newfoundland,  where 
some  of  the  foodstuffs  are  exchanged  for  "refuse" 
fish  (the  European  Catholics  get  the  better  grades). 
These  are  taken  to  the  West  Indies  for  the  slaves; 
and  the  return  is  made  with  cargoes  of  molasses, 
which  can  be  more  cheaply  distilled  into  rum 
in  New  England  than  in  the  Caribbean  islands, 
where  all  energy  goes  into  the  fields  of  cane.  Some 
of  the  rum  is  consumed  at  home,  especially  among 
the  fishermen,  but  some  is  carried  past  the  West 
Indies,  on  the  next  voyage,  to  the  Guinea  coast  of 
Africa,  from  Sierra  Leone  to  the  River  Congo 
(Map  4b),  where  it  plays  an  ugly  part  in  the  kid 
naping  of  negroes,  and  these  are  carried  to  the 
sugar  plantations  for  sale.  Some  of  the  high 
profits  thus  realized  are  invested  in  cargoes  of 
dye  woods,  cotton,  tobacco,  sugar,  cocoa,  etc., 
which  the  Yankee  skippers  take  to  England,  for 
other  European  ports  have  long  been  closed  to 
these  commodities  by  the  Act  of  1660  and  others. 
Here  they  further  improve  their  fortune  by  taking 

'In  1774. 

2  The  line  of  1767,  which  placed  the  West  Florida  boundary 
north  nearly  to  the  mouth  of  the  Yazoo,  32°  28',  north  latitude; 
cut  off  some  of  Georgia's  claim  beyond  the  Appalachicola- 
Chattahoochee  River. 


140 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


on  good   loads  of  English   manufactured  goods, 
and  put  sail  for  home.1 

What  annoys  the  Chancellor  is  that  the  New 
Englanders  do  not  import  their  molasses  solely 
from  Jamaica,  or  Barbadoes,  and  the  English 
Leeward  Islands  (Map  12),  but  also,  and  more 
largely,  from  Guadaloupe,  Martinique,  and  other 
French  possessions  in  the  Caribbean;  and,  most 
important,  they  generally  evade  the  high  duty  of 
sixpence  a  gallon,  imposed  in  1733.  Grenville  even 
now  is  preparing  soon,  in  March,  to  introduce  a 
bill  dropping  the  duty  to  threepence,  but  with 
provision  for  rigid  enforcement.  We  leave  him, 
therefore,  unwittingly  about  to  precipitate  a  crisis 
that  will  disrupt  the  old  British  Empire. 

The  colonies  were  not  internally  at  peace  during 
the  years  that  followed.  On  a  more  detailed  map 
we  can  locate  the  upper  waters  of  the  Cape  Fear 
River  (Map  19a),  where  the  Scotch  and  Scotch- 
Irish  settlers  felt  themselves  neglected  in  protec 
tion,  but  not  in  taxes;  without  due  voice  in  the 
legislature,  these  "Regulators  "  unsuccessfully  made 
war,  from  1767  to  1771,  against  Governor  Tryon 
and  his  "tidewater"  supporters.  Intercolonial 
disputes  may  be  illustrated  by  that  between  Vir 
ginia  and  Pennsylvania  over  the  Fort  Pitt  region 
(Map  16).  In  1774,  Lord  Dunmore,  governor  of 
the  former  province,  led  out  a  force  to  occupy 
these  valleys,  but  the  outbreak  of  an  Indian 
war  on  the  Kanawha  induced  him  to  take  it 
southwest  along  the  Ohio  to  that  region  (Map 
Study  No.  10). 

No  one  had  paid  much  heed  to  the  Proclamation 
Line  of  1763,  as  it  was  considered  temporary. 
North  Carolina  settlers  had  moved  to  the  valley 
of  the  Holston  (Map  19b),  and,  defying  Governor 
Tryon,  had  set  up  a  government  for  themselves 
known  as  the  Wataugua  Association.  After  Boone 
and  others  had  made  a  number  of  journeys  along 
a  trace  which  became  famous  as  the  Wilderness 
Road,  and  through  Cumberland  Gap  (Map  34), 


1  Many  ships  stopped,  en  route  from  the  Caribbean,  at  the 
"Wine  Islands,"  the  Madeiras  and  Canaries  (Map  4b). 


Judge  Richard  Henderson  acquired  a  huge  tract 
from  the  Indians  and  attempted,  in  1775,  to  erect 
a  proprietary  government  of  "Transylvania"  (Map 
17).  But  dissensions  and  the  opposition  of  North 
Carolina  and  Virginia  prevented  his  success  and 
these  far-western  colonists  remained  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  older  governments.  Some  time 
before,  prominent  speculators,  among  them  Frank 
lin,  had  obtained  from  England,  in  1768,  the  great 
Vandalia  grant  in  what  is  now  West  Virginia  and 
northeastern  Kentucky.  In  this  fashion  the  land 
rights  of  Virginia  were  disregarded,  but  a  number 
of  companies  were  being  formed  by  that  colony's 
consent  as  well  as  that  of  England.  This  was  the 
situation  when,  in  1774,  Quebec  was  extended  to 
the  Ohio  and  the  expansion  of  the  coastal  colonies 
curbed  apparently  for  all  time. 

From  his  reading  the  student  should  be  able  to 
locate,  with  date,  on  the  outline  map,  the  place  of 
meeting  of  the  Stamp  Act  Congress,  inferring  from 
its  geographical  position  which  large  section  of  the 
colonies  was  more  interested  in  united  protest  to 
England.  If  he  recalls  that  opposition  to  the  Sugar 
Act  was  closely  bound  up  with  that  to  the  stamps, 
this  will  help  in  explanation.  If  he  will  indicate, 
with  dates,  the  location  of  the  First  and  Second 
Continental  Congresses,  he  will  notice  some  appar 
ent  shifting  of  the  center  of  interest.  By  marking 
with  a  black  C  those'colonies  which  early  appointed 
intercolonial  Committees  of  Correspondence,  he 
will  gain  some  notion  of  the  comparative  degree 
of  feeling  up  and  down  the  seaboard  in  1773  and 
1774.  The  Gaspe  affair,  which  had  a  relation  to 
the  origin  of  these  committees,  will  be  better  under 
stood  if  its  location  is  regarded  in  connection  with 
the  trade  routes  recently  drawn  upon  the  world 
map.  What  ports  refused  the  tea?  And  what  was 
the  chief  port  of  Massachusetts  during  1774  and 
1775? 

By  the  use  of  Roman  numerals,  rate  the  colonies 
and  the  cities  in  1770  according  to  the  following 
estimates  taken  from  the  United  States  Census 
Report  of  1900: 


141 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


N.  H 60,000 

Mass 899,000 

R.  1 55,000 

Conn 175,000 

N.  Y.  (inc.  Vt.) .  185,000 

N.  J 110,000 

Pa 250,000 

Del 25,000 

Md 200,000 

Va.  (inc.  Ky.) .  .  450,000 

N.  C 230,000 

S.  C 140,000 

Ga 26,000 


Salem 5,000 

Boston 15,520 

Newport 9,000 

New  York 21,000 

Philadelphia 28,000 

Baltimore 5,000 

Charleston 10,000 


2,205,000 

Draw  the  frontier  line  of  the  colonies  at  the  be 
ginning  of  revolutionary  movement  (Map  16). 
Then,  using  the  following  data,  by  a  system  of 
shading,  with  key,  indicate  the  method  by  which 
representatives  were  selected  for  the  First  Con 
tinental  Congress,  noting  its  decidedly  irregular 
and  revolutionary  character. 

N.  H.  .     By  Provincial  Congress 
Mass.  .       "  Lower  (Popular)  House  of  Legislature 
R.  I. . .       "  Legislature 

Conn.  .       "  (with  help   of   Committees   of 

Correspondence) 


N.Y... 
N.  J... 

Pa.... 
Del.... 
Md.... 
Va.  . . . 
N.  C... 
S.  C.. 


By  City  and  (some)  County  Delegates 
Provincial  Congress 
Legislature  (Unicameral) 
Provincial  Congress 


Lower  (Popular)  House  of  Legislature  (ap 
proving  nominees  of  a  mass  meeting) 
Unrepresented 

With  the  aid,  when  necessary,  of  Jameson's 
Dictionary  of  United  States  History,  Appleton's, 
Lamb's,  or  the  National  biographical  encyclopedia, 
or  a  general  encyclopedia,  show  by  initials  the 
home  colonies  of  the  following  leaders,  mentioned 
by  Bassett  in  his  Chapter  VIII:  Samuel  Adams, 
Christopher  Gadsden,  Patrick  Henry,  Thomas 
Hutchinson,  Benjamin  Franklin,  James  Otis,  John 
Dickinson,  John  Adams,  Thomas  Jefferson,  John 
Jay,  James  Duane,  Edward  Rutledge,  Joseph 
Galloway,  Cadwallader  Colden,  John  Hancock, 
and  Josiah  Quincy.  Also  the  following,  men 
tioned  by  Carl  Becker  in  his  Beginnings  of  the 
American  People,  Chapter  VI:  Jonathan  May- 
hew,  Daniel  Delaney,  R.  H.  Lee,  Joseph  Warren, 
and  Samuel  Seabury. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  12 

THE   REVOLUTIONARY   WAR 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  183,  188-214;  John  Fiske,  American  Revolution,  vol.  i,  pp.  147-170,  198-238,  249- 
252,  258-276,  280-339;  vol.  ii,  pp.  59-66,  75-81,  104-115,  149-157,  163-193,  244-290, 
C.  H.  Van  Tyne,  American  Revolution,  chaps,  vii,  viii,  x,  xvi,  xviii. 

MAPS:  Middle  Atlantic  States;  South  Atlantic  States. 


travel,  as  well  as  a  true  understanding  of  our 
national  beginnings,  are  enhanced  by  a  knowledge 
of  them.  The  most  natural  and  effective  method 
of  gaining  such  an  understanding  would  include 
the  use  of  outline  maps. 

In  the  previous  map  studies  the  data  have  been 
carefully  suggested  and  the  method  of  presenta 
tion  often  prescribed.  But  by  this  time  the  student 
should  realize  the  possibilities  of  the  map,  and, 


American  Revolutionary  War  was  fought 
A  for  seven  years  and  over  a  great  extent  of 
territory.  It  is  true  that,  judged  by  modern 
standards,  but  few  men  were  employed  and  little 
money  was  spent;  yet  heroism  is  not  measured  by 
statistics.  The  campaigns  of  Washington  and  his 
generals,  with  their  record  of  sacrifice  and  deter 
mination,  have  become  a  part  of  our  national 
tradition,  and  the  pleasures  of  literature  and 


142 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


with  such  a  subject  as  this,  be  able  to  devise  and 
execute  a  complete  and  intelligible  illustration  by 
himself. 

Besides  the  routes  of  march,  year  by  year,  there 
are  many  other  things  that  can  well  be  noted,  and 
the  final  product  will  be  a  test  of  originality  no 
less  than  thoroughness.  The  maps  of  the  campaigns 
(Maps  18a,  18b,  18c,  and  19b)  will  aid,  but  can  be 
improved  and  elaborated  on  the  larger  outline 
maps  available  to  the  student.  He  will  find  a  good 
concise  summary  of  the  war  in  Bassett's  History, 
but,  if  time  can  possibly  be  found  for  about  two 
hundred  and  fifty  pages,  he  will  be  richly  repaid 
in  reading  John  Fiske's  American  Revolution  in  the 
citations  above.  He  will  be  unlike  most  Americans 
if  his  pulse  does  not  quicken  as  he  follows  this  clear 


and  vigorous  narrative,  even  though  many  inter 
esting  episodes,  like  the  frontier  warfare  and 
Arnold's  treason,  are  omitted.  There  are,  however, 
many  other  good  general  accounts,  such  as  that  of 
C.  H.  Van  Tyne's  American  Revolution. 

On  the  world  map  used  in  Map  Study  No.  11 
may  now  be  indicated  the  site  of  John  Paul  Jones's 
adventures;  the  European  nations  fighting  against 
England  in  1780,  those  neutral,  and  those  belong 
ing  to  the  League  of  Armed  Neutrality  which  ob 
jected  to  England's  maritime  code;  and  the  final 
residence  of  many  Loyalists  or  Tories  who  emi 
grated  at  the  close  of  the  war — Nova  Scotia,  New 
Brunswick,  Upper  Ontario  (north  of  the  lake),  the 
Bahamas,  Jamaica,  and  the  Leeward  Islands,  as 
well  as  England. 


MAP    STUDY    No.  13 
ORGANIZING  A  NATION:    FROM  JEALOUSY  TO  CONFIDENCE 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  226-254;    McLaughlin,  The  Confederation  and  the  Constitution. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 

IN  the  peace  negotations  at  Paris,  in  1782  and 
1783,  the  Americans  expected  to  get  at  least 
all  the  British  lands  south  of  what  had  formerly 
been  acknowledged  as  French  Canada  (Map  14) 
as  far  as  the  Floridas.  But  John  Jay  had  reason 
to  believe  that  the  French  allies,  represented  by 
Count  Vergennes,  were  recommending  an  arrange 
ment  which  might  limit  the  new  nation  to  the 
Atlantic  coastal  region  (Map  20).  Partly  on  this 
account  the  American  commissioners  negotiated 
separately  with  England  and  obtained  a  favorable 
boundary  (Map  21a),  though  one  which,  as  we 
shall  see,  gave  rise  later  to  disputes,  notably  in 
the  case  of  Maine  and  West  Florida. 

During  the  year  immediately  following  the  Rev 
olution  the  name  "United  States"  was  more  a 
prophecy  than  the  description  of  a  fact.  Among 
other  causes  of  misunderstanding  were  overlapping 
land  claims.  New  Hampshire  had  resigned  her 
claims  to  Vermont  in  1780,  but  New  York  retained 


hers  for  another  decade,  and  the  Green  Mountain 
boys  had  many  a  violent  altercation  with  "York- 
state"  sheriffs  and  surveyors  (Maps  20  and  21a). 
Adventurers  from  Connecticut,  the  mother  state 
of  many  emigrants,  had  early  settled  along  the 
east  branch  of  the  Susquehannah  in  northeastern 
Pennsylvania  (Map  16),  and  until  1790  Connecti 
cut  supported  their  claims  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Wyoming  Valley,  against  the  law  of  the 
Philadelphia  legislature.  The  so-called  "Penna- 
mite  Wars  "  were  the  result.  Beyond  the  Appalach 
ians  there  were  conflicting  claims,  which  were  based 
on  colonial  charters  (Map  2 la),  but  these,  fortu 
nately,  were  ceded  to  the  nation,  as  may  be  in 
dicated  with  dates.  Virginia,  desiring  to  reward 
her  soldiers,  retained  a  large  tract  between  the 
Scioto  River  and  the  Little  Miami,  which  runs 
some  twenty-five  miles  east  of  and  parallel  to  the 
Great  Miami  (Map  28b). 

New  York  had  claimed  most  of  Ohio  and  north- 


143 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


era  Kentucky,  as  may  be  shown  with  a  heavy 
dotted  line,  because  those  lands  were  occupied  by 
tribes  acknowledging  the  overlordship  of  the  Iro- 
quois,  but  had  abandoned  this  contention  in  1780. 
General  Sullivan's  raid,  in  1779,  crushed  the  power 
of  the  Six  Nations  and  brought  about  the  Treaty 
of  Fort  Stanwix  (Map  16),  in  1784,  by  which  the 
extinction  of  the  Indian  land  titles  was  begun. 
This  made  of  interest  to  prospective  settlers  the 
claim  of  Massachusetts  to  the  western  part  of  New 
York,  which  she  maintained  was  beyond  the  line 
of  the  Duke  of  York's  grant  and  hence  fell  within 
her  prior  right  (Map  Study  No.  6).  This  was 
settled  in  1786  by  giving  to  New  York  the  political 
jurisdiction,  and  to  Massachusetts  the  fee  in  the 
land,  which  was  now  sold  to  private  speculators. 
Connecticut  had  sent  out  settlements  to  southern 
New  York  as  well  as  to  Pennsylvania,  but  finally, 
in  1800,  she  renounced  all  her  claims  beyond  her 
own  acknowledged  western  limits,  giving  up  even 
her  "Western  Reserve"  along  the  shore  of  Lake 
Erie  which  she  had  retained  after  cession  of  1786 
(Map  21a).  When  New  York  yielded  her  rights 
in  the  West  in  1780,  she  placed  her  own  boundary 
on  the  meridian  of  the  western  end  of  Lake  Ontario; 
this  left  outside  the  "Erie  Triangle,"  at  the  north 


west  corner  of  Pennsylvania.  After  Connecticut 
had  ceded  her  claims  in  1786  this  was  clearly  in 
possession  of  the  national  government,  which  later 
disposed  of  it  to  Pennsylvania  so  that  that  state 
might  have  a  harbor  on  Lake  Erie. 

After  reading  Bassett,  pp.  235-236,  indicate  with 
the  letters  P.M.  the  states  where  paper  money 
was  issued,  and  mark  those  districts  where  the 
conflict  on  this  question,  in  1786  and  1787,  was 
particularly  acute.  Locate  the  site  of  important 
interstate  conferences  or  conventions  held  in  1785, 
1786,  and  1787  (Bassett,  pp.  241-242).  Using 
Roman  numerals,  rank  the  most  populous  five 
states,  and  with  a  large  letter  L  mark  the  states 
comprising  the  "large  state  group"  in  the  Con 
vention  (Ibid.,  pp.  243-244).  Using  Maps  22a 
and  22b,  show  the  distribution  of  votes  on  the  rati- 
„  fication  of  the  Constitution.  It  will  be  observed 
that,  in  general,  the  commercial  districts  and 
those  where  large-propertied  men  desired  Federal 
protection  against  any  possible  democratic  up 
rising  (as  in  South  Carolina)  were  in  favor  and  the 
small  farmers  opposed.  Some  frontier  districts, 
like  western  Virginia  and  Georgia,  desired  the 
military  power  of  a  strong  government  to  be  di 
rected  against  the  Indians. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  14 
THE  NEW  GOVERNMENT  IN  ACTION 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  256-263,  267-269.  277-282;   Bassett,  Federalist  System,  pp.  3-41,  56-68,  101-116, 

218-251. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 


WE  have  already  noticed  (Map  Study  No.  11) 
that  the  valleys  of  the  Kentucky,  the 
Cumberland,  and  the  upper  Tennessee  were  reached 
by  pioneer  farmers  before  the  Revolution.  Most 
of  the  settlers  had  trudged  along  the  Wilderness 
Road  from  Fort  Chiswell  (Map  15b),  where  roads 
from  Pennsylvania  and  from  Richmond  converged, 
to  and  through  the  Cumberland  Gap  in  what 
is  now  Tennessee  not  far  from  the  present  south 
west  corner  of  Virginia  (Map  34).  By  the  end  of 


the  war  there  was  available  the  Tennessee  Path, 
starting  at  the  new  town  of  Abingdon  (Map  34), 
some  seventy  miles  beyond  Fort  Chiswell,  but 
crossing  the  headwaters  a  little  south  of  the 
Wilderness  Road  and  leading  westward  to  the 
cabins  of  the  settlement  founded  by  James  Robert 
son,  in  1780,  as  Nashboro  (Map  19b),  but  renamed 
Nashville  in  1784.1  This  fairly  level  road  was  as 


1  The  town  was  named  in  honor  of  Gen.  Francis  Nash,  a 
North  Carolinian  killed  in  the  battle  of  Germantown. 


144 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


convenient  for  the  Cumberland  settlers  as  that 
through  the  Gap  for  the  Kentuckians.  The  Wa- 
taugua  Association  (Map  19b  and  Map  Study  No. 
11)  took  advantage  of  a  temporary  cession  of 
western  claims  by  North  Carolina  to  the  nation 
in  1784  to  organize  a  "state  of  Franklin"  and 
apply  for  admission  to  the  Union;  but,  on  North 
Carolina's  resuming  jurisdiction,  other  westerners 
overthrew  Governor  Sevier's  "state,"  and  Ten 
nessee,  though  undeniably  restive,  continued  under 
the  eastern  state  government  till  1794,  when  or 
ganized  as  a  territory.  It  became  a  state  in  1796, 
four  years  after  Kentucky  and  five  years  after 
Vermont. 

We  have  also  observed  that  the  early  settlers  of 
the  West  went  through  the  southern  mountains, 
but  by  1790  another  stream  had  begun  to  pour 
into  the  Ohio  Valley  through  Pittsburg,  which 
had  been  laid  out  as  a  town  in  1764.  "Three  routes 
met  at  Pittsburg:  one  from  Philadelphia  by  the 
west  branch  of  the  Susquehanna  (Map  19b),  a 
forty-mile  portage  over  the  divide,  and  Toby 
Creek  to  the  Allegheny  at  Kittanning;  a  second 
farther  south,  also  from  Philadelphia,  by  the 
Juniata  tributary  to  the  Susquehanna  (Map  34), 
or  by  a  more  direct  trace  known  as  Forbes  Road 
(Map  Study  No.  10)  from  Carlisle  through  Ship- 
pensburgh,  Fort  Lyttleton,  and  Fort  Bedford  (Map 
19b),  and  thence  by  an  easy  mountain  pass  to 
Fort  Ligonier  and  on  down  the  Allegheny  or  across 
a  low  dividing  range  to  the  forks  of  the  Ohio; 
and  a  third  up  the  Potomac  to  Fort  Cumberland 
and  thence  by  Braddock's  Road  over  the  divide 
to  the  Youghiogheny  (Map  17)  on  to  Redstone 
Old  Fort  (given  as  Brownsville  on  Map  34)  on  the 
Monongahela."  * 

"In  our  entire  region  of  the  Appalachians,"  re 
marks  another  writer,2  "from  the  Berkshire  Hills 
southward,  practically  every  old-time  pathway  from 

1  E.  C.  Sample,  American  History  and  Its  Geographic  Condition, 
p.  65.     If  one  is  desirous  of  following  this  description  in  com 
plete  detail  he  will  find  the  map  under  "Pennsylvania"  in 
the  Encyclopedia  Britannica  quite  satisfactory.      There  is  an 
excellent  map  of  the  early  roads  to  the  West  in  Seymour  Dun- 
bar's  History  of  Travel  in  America  (Indianapolis,  1915),  vol.  i, 
p.  152.     The  illustrations  in  this  work  are  from  a  remarkable 
series  of  rare  pictures  of  ways  and  means  of  travel  on  this 
continent,  and  are  cordially  recommended  to  the  student. 

2  A.  B.  Hulbert,  The  Paths  of  Inland  Commerce  (New  Haven, 
1920),  p.  20. 

10  145 


the  seaboard  to  the  trans-Alleghany  country  was 
occupied  by  an  important  railway  system,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Warrior's  Trail  through  Cumber 
land  Gap  to  central  Ohio  and  the  Highland  Trail 
across  southern  Pennsylvania,  and  even  Cumber 
land  Gap  is  accessible  by  rail  to-day,  and  a  line 
across  southern  Pennsylvania  was  once  planned  and 
partially  constructed,  only  to  be  killed  by  jealous 
rivals." 

The  Northwest  Territory,  organized  in  1787, 
may  be  indicated  roughly  from  the  dotted  area  on 
Map  37.  Two  settlements  had  been  made  almost 
immediately:  Marietta  (Map  26),  by  New  Eng- 
landers  under  the  Ohio  Company,  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Muskingum  and  close  to  Fort  Harmar, 
which  had  been  built  three  years  before;  and  Cin 
cinnati,  opposite  the  Licking  River,  in  1789,  by 
John  Cleves  Symmes,  who  with  a  company  of 
New  Jerseymen  had  recently  bought  about  a  mil 
lion  and  a  quarter  acres  lying  west  from  the  Great 
Miami  River.  Chillicothe,  the  most  important 
town  of  the  Virginia  military  lands  (Map  Study 
No.  13),  was  founded  in  1796,  while  a  little  band  of 
Connecticut  people  under  Moses  Cleaveland  began 
the  settlement  of  Cleveland  in  the  Western  Re 
serve  in  the  same  year. 

The  earliest  settlers  were  harassed  by  Shawnees 
and  Dela wares  (Map  13  and  Map  Study  No.  7), 
who  were  encouraged  by  the  British  still  remaining 
in  the  western  posts,  Oswego,  Fort  Niagara,  Erie, 
Fort  Miami,1  Detroit,  Fort  Mackinac,  and  others. 
(Maps  28  and  28b).  The  Indians  on  their  expedi 
tions  so  plagued  the  Kentucky  frontier  that  many 
pioneers  joined  the  force  of  Gen.  Josiah  Harmar, 
who,  in  1790,  met  the  enemy  near  the  site  of 
Chillicothe,  on  the  Scioto.  He  was  defeated,  but 
the  soldiers  and  settlers  eagerly  renewed  the  at 
tack  the  following  year  under  the  governor  of  the 
territory,  Gen.  Arthur  St.  Clair.  The  new  army 
of  2,000  men  marched  from  Fort  Washington 
(Cincinnati),  intending  to  establish  a  chain  of 
forts  from  the  Ohio  to  the  Maumee.  It  reached 
the  headwaters  of  the  Wabash,  with  numbers 

1  There  were  three  Fort'Miamis:  one  in  what  is  now  northern 
Illinois,  one  where  Fort  Wayne  was  later  erected,  and  one  built 
at  the  falls  of  the  Maumee  by  the  British  im  1794,  and  which 
figured  in  Wayne's  battle  of  Fallen  Timber.  The  reference 
above  is  to  the  second. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


lessened  by  desertions  and  detachments  to  1,400, 
and  there  was  ambushed  and  disgracefully  routed. 

The  frontier,  now  all  but  terrorized,  awaited 
effective  aid  from  the  national  government.  Forces 
were  maintained  at  Forts  Harmar  and  Washington, 
and  at  Vincennes.  In  1792  Anthony  Wayne, 
general  in  chief  of  the  United  States  army,  ar 
rived  in  Pittsburg  and  began  drilling  a  force  which 
he  led  out  from  Cincinnati  the  next  year.  On  the 
field  of  St.  Glair's  defeat  he  built  Fort  Recovery 
(Map  28a),  and  with  his  little  army,  strengthened 
by  Kentucky  militia,  who  now  arrived,  he  struck 
north  to  the  Maumee,  where  he  set  up  Fort  De 
fiance  at  the  mouth  of  the  Au  Glaize.  He  then 
followed  down  the  river  to  the  falls,  where  the 
British  had  illegally  built  a  work  called  Fort 
Miami  (a  short  distance  up  the  Maumee  from 
its  mouth),  and  here  Wayne's  disciplined  troops 
completely  defeated  the  Indians  in  the  battle  of 
Fallen  Timber,  August  20,  1794.  Now  falling  back 
along  the  road  that  he  had  cut,  the  general  pro 
ceeded  to  the  confluence  of  the  St.  Marys  and  the 
St.  Joseph  Rivers,  where  he  erected  a  stockade, 
named  in  his  honor,  and  then,  retiring  to  the  south, 
he  made  his  winter  quarters  at  Greenville.  In 
this  place  was  signed  the  Treaty  of  Fort  Greenville, 
1795,  running  a  line  east  from  Fort  Recovery  and 
finally  north  to  the  site  of  Cleveland,  as  is  shown 
upon  our  map,  beyond  which,  with  the  exception 
of  the  forts,  was  recognized  as  belonging  to  the 
Indians.  But  our  map  also  makes  clear  that  In 
dian  tenure  seldom  long  endured;  they  parted  with 
this  land  in  1805  and  1807.  After  the  Treaty  of 
Fort  Greenville  the  northeastern  region  was  set 
tled  much  more  rapidly;  the  territory  was  divided 
in  1800  (Map  24),  and  Ohio,  with  its  western 
boundary  rectified,  was  admitted  as  a  state  in 
1802  (Map  27). 

As  the  Indians  had  egged  on  the  northern  In 
dians,  so  the  Spanish  carried  on  intrigues  among 
those  of  the  south,  more  numerous  and  hardly  less 
formidable.  "The  warriors  of  the  four  great 
southern  confederacies — the  Cherokees,  the  Creeks, 
the  Chickasaws,  and  the  Choctaws — were  estimated 
to  be  14,000,  giving  a  total  population  of  about 
70,000.  The  Chickasaws,  inhabiting  that  portion 
of  the  present  state  of  Tennessee  west  of  the 


Tennessee  River,  and  the  Choctaws,  dwelling  prin 
cipally  on  the  headwaters  of  the  Pearl  .  .  .  and 
extending  thence  to  the  Mississippi,1  being  too  far 
from  the  frontier  to  be  exposed  to  collision  with 
the  back  settlers,  had  always  been  on  good  terms 
with  the  Anglo-Amcncans,  and  the  friendship 
established  with  those  tribes  by  the  treaties  of 
Hopewell  (1786)  still  remained  unbroken.  The 
case  was  very  different  with  the  Cherokees  and  the 
Creeks,  brought  into  immediate  and  irritating 
collision  with  the  frontier  settlers  of  the  Carolinas 
and  Georgia.  The  Cherokees  claimed  the  Cum 
berland  River  as  their  northern  boundary,  their 
territory  embracing  the  larger  portion  of  the  pres 
ent  state  of  Tennessee,  with  parts  also  of  the 
Carolinas  and  Georgia."  2 

Neither  the  whites  nor  the  Indians  paid  much 
attention  to  the  treaties;  the  warriors  again  and 
again  attacked  Robertson's  settlers  at  Nashville, 
while  by  1789  the  Tennesseeans  had  fought  their 
way  far  into  the  Cherokee  lands,  despite  the  re 
monstrance  of  Congress.  The  Georgians  made 
three  treaties  with  the  Creeks,  in  1783,  1785,  and 
1786,  yielding  them  a  considerable  tract  of  Creek 
land  south  and  wrest  of  the  Oconee,  which  they 
granted  as  military  bounties.  But  they  had  no 
right  thus  to  usurp  a  congressional  function;  and 
according  to  Alexander  McGillivray,  the  half- 
breed  Creek  leader,  the  negotiating  Indian  chiefs 
had  likewise  no  adequate  authority.  The  savages, 
well  armed  by  the  Spaniards,  wrere  waging  a  dev 
astating  war  upon  the  whites  at  the  time  the  new 
government  of  the  United  States  was  instituted, 
but  negotiations  begun  on  the  Oconee  and  con 
tinued  in  New  York  supported  the  Creek  position, 
which  the  government  at  Savannah  accepted  with 
bad  grace.  In  spite  of  a  pension  from  Congress, 
however,  McGillivray,  when  back  in  his  town, 
soon  resumed  his  intrigue  with  the  Spaniards. 

Georgia,  in  1794  and  1795,  granted  to  three 
companies  the  title  to  the  land  indicated  on  our 
Map  21b,  but  because  the  grant  was  issued  under 
influence  of  corruption  the  succeeding  legislature 
declared  it  void.  The  United  States  claimed  the 


146 


1  Follow  Map  15b  or  34  for  the  location  of  the  Indians. 

2  Richard    Hildreth,    History   of  the    United   States,    Second 
Series  (New  York,  1851),  vol.  i,  p.  140. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


jurisdiction  of  the  land,  especially  below  the  lati 
tude  of  the  Yazoo  mouth,  where  it  had  acquired 
England's  rights  in  1783  (Map  Study  No.  13). 
There  were,  therefore,  three  claimants — the  com 
panies,  Georgia,  and  the  national  government. 
The  two  latter  settled  their  dispute  in  1802,  as  is 
shown  upon  our  map,  and  the  national  govern 
ment  made  an  arrangement  in  marking  off  lands 
for  the  Indians,  which  was  satisfactory  for  the 
time,  though  it  left  some  within  the  bounds  of 
Georgia  (Map  39b).  The  companies'  rights  as 
against  Georgia  were  upheld  by  the  Supreme 
Court  in  1810,  and  in  1816,  after  much  debate,  in 
which  the  speculators  and  their  friends  were  de 
nounced  as  preying  on  the  government — the  so- 
called  "Yazoo  fraud" — Congress  bought  their 
claims.  The  treaty  with  Spain  in  1795  had  fixed 
the  southern  boundary  of  the  United  States  as  the 
31st  parallel  of  latitude  (Map  21b);  in  1798  the 
Mississippi  Territory  was  organized  (Map  24); 
and  shortly  after  the  arrangement  of  1802  this 
was  enlarged  to  include  all  land  to  Tennessee 
(Map  27). 

There  were  other  and  even  more  important  ques 
tions  than  frontier  defense,  especially  that  of 
financial  policy.  Hamilton,  in  his  desire  to  strength 
en  American  credit  in  general  and  to  align  the 
moneyed  men  with  the  central  government,  pro 
posed  that  the  nation  assume  the  debts  of  the 
states.  Those  south  and  west  of  New  Jersey  and 
Delaware,  except  South  Carolina,  had  paid  a  good 
part  of  theirs  and  were,  therefore,  quite  opposed 
to  this  on  economic  as  well  as  political  grounds. 
On  the  outline  map  the  vote  of  July  24,  1790,  may 
be  indicated  with  shaded  areas  from  the  follow 


ing  data:  For — Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  New 
Jersey,  Delaware,  South  Carolina;  against — New 
Hampshire,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Virginia, 
North  Carolina,  Georgia;  evenly  divided — New 
York;  not  in  the  Union — Rhode  Island.  The 
student  will  recognize  a  connection  between  this 
question  and  that  of  the  location  of  the  successive 
capitals  of  the  United  States. 

The  Excise  Law  of  March  3,  1791,  was  especially 
resented  by  the  Scotch-Irish  farmers  of  the  west 
ern  counties  of  Pennsylvania,  Virginia,  and  North 
Carolina,  who  were  accustomed  to  convert  a  part 
of  their  corn  and  grain  into  whisky  for  easier 
marketing  or  as  a  medium  of  exchange.  In  Penn 
sylvania,  the  inhabitants  around  Union,  Wash 
ington,  and  Pittsburg  (Map  34)  were  especially 
disaffected,  and  in  July,  1794,  organized  themselves 
against  the  government  agents  and  committed 
acts  of  violence.  The  President,  finding  that  the 
state  government  did  not  act,  displayed  the  power 
of  the  new  nation  by  calling  out  15,000  troops, 
which  needed  only  to  assemble  to  awe  the  rioters 
into  submission. 

It  was  charged  that  the  Whisky  Insurrection 
had  been  fomented  by  the  so-called  "Democratic 
Societies,"  which  had  been  formed  after  the  arrival 
of  Citizen  Genet,  who  landed  in  Charleston,  April, 
1793.  Bearing  in  mind  that  the  vote  on  the  As 
sumption  Bill  roughly  corresponded  to  the  division 
into  Federalists  and  Jeffersonians,  a  line  tracing 
his  route  by  land  to  Philadelphia  (Map  34)  may 
indicate  one  reason  for  Genet's  confidence  in  the 
sympathy  of  America.  Would  not  his  impressions 
have  been  different  had  he  landed  at  Boston  and 
from  there  journeyed  to  the  capital? 


MAP   STUDY    No.  15 


AGRARIANISM    AND    EXPANSION:     ATTENTION    TURNING    TOWARD 

THE  WEST 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  288-300,  306-320,  355-357;    Charming,  Jejfersonian  System. 
MAP:  The  United  States. 


NO  less  an  authority  than  John  Marshall  in 
forms  us  that  the  Federalists  were  chiefly 
men  with  business  interests  to  protect  and  foster, 
and  with  accumulated  wealth  to  loan.  They  fa 
vored  laws  and  policies  that  seemed  from  this  point 
of  view  to  serve  the  country,  and,  being  men  of 
executive  experience  and  high  notions  of  order, 
they  not  only  built  up  an  efficient  government, 
but  tended  to  overemphasize  the  importance  of 
control.  This  was  resented  by  the  self-reliant 
planters  and  farmers,  and  especially  by  those  who 
had  borrowed  money  to  outfit  themselves.  By 
drawing  lines  which  represent,  in  the  main,  the 
boundaries  of  the  area  settled  by  six  or  more  to 
the  square  mile,  respectively  in  1790  and  in  1800 
(Map  23a),  it  will  appear  that  this  inland  element 
was  growing.  This  restive  population  complained 
of  strong  government  as  savoring  of  England,  and 
admired  the  French  as  the  modern  exemplars  of 
liberty  and  equality.  They,  therefore,  were  op 
posed  to  war  with  France,  which  threatened  on 
account  of  diplomatic  insults  recently  received, 
and  bitterly  complained  of  the  Alien  and  Sedi 
tion  laws,  passed  by  Federalists  to  curb  French 
propaganda. 

In  the  vote  on  the  proposed  repeal  of  these  ob 
noxious  laws  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
February  25,  1799,  all  New  England,  including  the 
District  of  Maine,  voted  against,  except  Vermont, 
equally  divided,  and  three  small  portions  of  Mas 
sachusetts — Cape  Cod;  the  district  southeast  of 
the  bend  in  the  Merrimac  River;  and  Berkshire 
County,  a  strip  along  the  New  York  border. 
Likewise  New  York,  except  the  southern  part, 
was  for  the  laws,  and  New  Jersey,  Delaware,  and 
Maryland,  but  for  the  region  from  Baltimore  south 
to  the  Potomac.  The  rest  of  the  nation  favored 


repeal,  with  the  following  exceptions:  the  vicinity 
of  Philadelphia;  the  districts  on  the  lower  Sus- 
quehannah;  the  Virginia  piedmont;  the  southern 
portion  of  the  Yadkin  Valley  in  North  Carolina 
(Map  24),  and  a  strip  along  the  northern  bank  of 
the  Savannah.  Now  if  the  student,  after  illus 
trating  this  division,  will  represent  by  the  letters 
J  and  A,  as  initials  of  the  candidates,  the  vote  by 
states  in  1800  (Map  23b),  he  will  observe  a  corre 
lation,  and  will  also  note  how  far  the  agrarian 
interest  favored  Jefferson. 

So  marked  was  the  preference  of  the  new  Presi 
dent,  on  his  part,  that  the  nation  was  not  surprised 
to  hear,  in  his  inaugural  address,  an  expression  of 
his  view  of  the  comparative  importance  of  the 
farmer  and  the  merchant,  desiring  "the  encourage 
ment  of  agriculture,  and  of  commerce  as  its  hand 
maid."  The  location  of  the  homes  of  Jefferson's 
cabinet  officers  shows  the  regions  where  he  desired 
to  recognize  or  to  encourage  support :  James  Madi 
son,  Secretary  of  State,  at  Montpelier,  near  Orange 
Court  House  (Map  57b) ;  Albert  Gallatin,  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  at  Geneva,  Pennsylvania,  on  the 
east  bank  of  the  Monongahela,  a  few  miles 
from  the  state  boundary  (Map  24);  Henry  Dear 
born,  Secretary  of  War,  near  Augusta,  Maine,  then 
part  of  Massachusetts  (Frontispiece);  Robert 
Smith,  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  at  Baltimore  (Map 
25),  and  Levi  Lincoln,  Attorney-General,  at  Wor 
cester,  Massachusetts  (Map  16).  The  President's 
own  home  at  Charlottesville,  Virginia  (Map  19a), 
of  course,  should  also  be  indicated. 

Our  western  settlers,  who  by  1800  had  spread 
along  the  Ohio  almost  to  the  Cumberland,  and  who 
were  rapidly  increasing  in  Tennessee,  were  often 
irritated  that  their  doorway  to  the  world,  New 

Orleans,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  king  of  Spain. 
148 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


When,  in  1802,  the  right  of  deposit,  or  landing 
and  loading,  was  for  a  second  time  denied  them 
there,  they  made  loud  complaint;  and  when  it 
was  learned  that  Louisiana  had  passed  to  the  em 
pire  of  the  powerful  Napoleon,  the  government 
echoed  their  cry  of  apprehension.  But  there  were 
those  who  realized  that  the  acquisition  of  that 
territory  was  more  than  a  matter  of  defense; 
that  the  natural  expansion  of  our  people  would 
sometime  crowd  out  all  the  claims  of  European 
monarchies,  whose  distance  made  the  competition 
quite  unequal.  Rivers  do  not  make  good  boun 
daries;  conquest  and  settlement  make  transverse 
lines  across  them,  so  as  to  make  the  river  a  high 
way  of  successive  culture  areas,  rather  than  a 
permanent  political  barrier  between  them.  All 
this  is  quite  apparent  to  one  who  has  read  the 
history  of  the  ;  Rhine,  the  Danube,  or  even  the 
St.  Lawrence. 

By  1800  the  American  settlement  had  not  only 
become  predominant  in  the  region  about  Natchez 
and  Bayou  Pierre  (Map  21b),  but,  on  invitation 
from  the  Spanish  governor,  it  had  gone  on  before 
the  flag  and  become  important  in  such  places  as  St. 
Louis,  St.  Charles,  Cape  Girardeau,  New  Madrid 
(Map  34),  and  Ste.  Genevieve  (Map  15a),  across 
the  Mississippi,  while  some  had  reached  Natchi- 
toches  on  the  Red  and  Baton  Rouge  in  West 
Florida  (Map  21b).  Jefferson  highly  valued  the 
western  pioneers,  who  thus  brought  acres  under 
cultivation,  and  hoped  that  as  soon  as  possible  they 
might  carry  republican  institutions  indefinitely 
westward.  Therefore,  in  the  crisis  of  1802  he  set 
about  to  buy  Louisiana,  soon  realizing  that,  as 
settlement  and  commerce  had  made  clear,  New 
Orleans  and  the  inland  region  beyond  the  Missis 
sippi  were  interdependent  and  must  be  brought 
together.  The  purchase  was  made,  and  by  a  sub 
sequent  act  the  land  now  included  in  the  state  of 
Louisiana,  except  its  portion  east  of  the  Missis 
sippi,  was  made  the  territory  of  Orleans,  while  the 
rest  retained  the  old  name,  Louisiana  (Map  27). 

But  the  boundaries  of  the  purchase  were  not 
clearly  stipulated.  The  natural  limits,  which  may 
be  indicated  from  Map  27,  show  the  area  of  our 
country  beyond  the  Appalachians  as  like  a  funnel 
with  a  narrow  spout  at  New  Orleans.  Now  "rivers 


149 


and  nations  strive  equally  to  reach  the  sea,"1  and 
great  pressure  might  be  expected  on  both  sides  of 
this  constricted  outlet.  As  our  Map  30  shows,  the 
United  States  for  sixteen  years  claimed  all  the 
land  to  the  Rio  Grande,  on  a  broad  historical 
definition  of  the  ancient  province  of  Louisiana, 
but  the  whole  of  this  was  not  obtained  for  another 
generation.  On  the  east,  Jefferson  maintained 
that  the  purchased  region  had  at  least  once  been 
supposed  to  reach  to  the  Perdido  River  (Map  26b), 
and  accordingly,  in  1804,  he  had  the  environs  of 
Mobile  Bay,  together  with  some  other  territory, 
organized  as  a  revenue  district.  But  he  cautiously 
located  its  customs  house  at  Fort  Stoddert  (Map 
26a),  on  land  agreed  by  all  as  belonging  to  the 
United  States. 

This  "Mobile  Act"  brought  such  able  and  severe 
remonstrance  from  Spain,  however,  that  the  Presi 
dent  retreated,  declaring  that  he  had  been  mis 
understood.  The  first  permanent  annexation  of 
West  Florida  lands  came  in  1810,  when  a  revolu 
tion  carried  through  by  Americans  resident  near 
Baton  Rouge  established  a  "commonwealth"  of 
West  Florida.  On  application  from  its  officers, 
President  Madison,  without  pausing  until  Con 
gress  reassembled,  authorized  Governor  Claiborne 
of  the  territory  of  Orleans  to  march  troops  as  far 
as  the  Pearl  River,  the  region  intervening  between 
that  and  the  Perdido  being  still  claimed,  but  not 
now  to  be  occupied.  Madison  justified  this  sum 
mary  addition  of  four  new  districts  to  the  territory 
of  Orleans  on  the  presidential  interpretation  of  the 
treaty  of  1803,  but,  inasmuch  as  the  Spanish 
claim  had  heretofore  not  actively  been  challenged, 
the  President's  action  has  generally  been  consid 
ered  as  somewhat  aggressive.  Later,  Spain's  im 
proper  hospitality  to  British  troops  about  Mobile 
provided  an  occasion  for  the  occupation  of  1813 
alluded  to  on  Map  26b. 

About  a  year  after  the  purchase  of  Louisiana, 
Jefferson  sent  out  a  scientific  expedition  under 
Capt.  Meriwether  Lewis  and  Lieut.  William  Clark 
to  explore  the  western  country  as  far  as  the  Pa 
cific.  This  accorded  with  the  President's  desire 
for  expansion  quite  as  much  as  with  his  genuine 
devotion  to  natural  science,  for  the  journey,  whose 

1  E.  C.  Semple,  American  History,  p.  107. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


routes  may  be  traced  from  Map  25,  was  later 
used  as  one  claim  to  Oregon.  Interest  in  the  West 
was  further  evidenced  and  fostered  by  the  expedi 
tion  of  Capt.  Zebulon  M.  Pike,  who  in  1805  and 
1806  followed  the  Mississippi  from  St.  Louis  almost 
to  its  source,  and  during  the  next  two  years  led  a 
party  from  the  same  place  up  the  Osage  River 
(Map  36),  thence  to  touch  the  Republican,  and 
almost  due  south  again  to  the  Arkansas,  up  which 
he  followed  till  he  reached  the  region  of  the  peak 
that  bears  his  name.  He  then  went  on  to  Santa 
Fe,  the  second  oldest  town  within  the  present 
limits  of  our  nation,  south  to  cross  the  Rio 
Grande,  where  now  stands  El  Paso  (Map  83), 
and,  curving  through  the  region  to  the  south, 
around  to  Natchitoches.  Several  times  in  the 
latter  portion  of  his  journey  he  was  roughly 
treated  by  the  Spanish  officials,  who  felt  they 
had  good  reason  to  suspect  the  curiosity  of  the 
American  government. 

It  was  natural  that  Spain  should  resent  the  sale 
of  Louisiana  to  the  United  States,  contrary  to 
Napoleon's  express  engagement,  and  that  she  should 
seek  to  hold  the  new  proprietor,  if  possible,  to  the 
Red  River  as  a  boundary.  War  seemed  imminent 
in  1806;  and  the  West  was  ready.  It  was  doubt 
less  this  anti-Spanish  feeling  that  brought  many 


to  support  the  mysteriously  veiled  schemes  of 
Aaron  Burr.  Following  Map  26a,  the  student 
should  indicate  his  route  in  1806  and  1807,  and  the 
region  of  his  land  claims. 

Time  showed  that  Spain  had  ceased  to  be  a 
menace;  she  could  not  hold  her  Indians  to  peace, 
it  was  true,  but  she  no  longer  urged  them  on  to 
war.  But  the  citizens  of  the  Northwest  had  reason 
to  believe  that  the  British  in  Canada  had  never 
abated  their  zeal  in  stirring  the  savages  against 
American  frontiersmen.  Using  Map  27,  the  polit 
ical  division  of  the  Northwest  Territory  by  1809 
may  be  indicated,  and  using  Map  28a,  some  lines 
may  be  drawn  which  help  us  to  understand  the 
Indian  point  of  view.  Oftentimes  the  treaties 
were  extorted  by  a  show  of  arms  and  plentiful 
disbursement  of  strong  liquor;  but  the  white  men 
seldom  waited  even  for  these  treaties.  The  battle 
field  of  Tippecanoe,  in  1811,  about  eighty  miles 
up  the  Wabash  from  Fort  Harrison,  should  be 
indicated.  It  will  be  remembered  that  England's 
interest  in  this  battle  contributed  to  the  irritation 
felt  against  that  government,  along  with  other 
incidents:  the  Leander  affair  of  1805  in  New  York 
harbor,  the  Chesapeake  and  Leopard  in  1807  off 
Cape  Henry  (Map  34),  and  the  President  and  the 
Little  Belt  also  off  the  Virginia  coast. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  16 

THE   SECOND  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  320-333;   Babcock,  Rise  of  American  Nationality,  pp.  50-201. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 


men  of  business  in  the  seaboard  cities, 
A  venturing  heavily  in  foreign  commerce,  were 
averse  to  offending  the  Mistress  of  the  Seas. 
With  Europe  at  war  they  enjoyed  a  great  increase 
of  the  carrying  trade  and  preferred  to  risk  occasion 
al  indignities  and  loss  at  England's  hands,  all  of 
which  they  could  more  than  offset  in  their  prices, 
rather  than  take  a  firm  stand  for  national  self- 
respect  that  would  severely  cut  their  profits.  Many 
of  them,  too,  especially  in  New  England,  were  old 


Federalists  who  added  to  their  business  concerns 
a  sentiment  of  admiration  of  British  ways  and  in 
stitutions.  By  tradition  they  abhorred  any  policy 
of  Jeffersonians.  They  opposed  the  embargo;  they 
were  against  the  war.  But  the  small  farmers,  many 
of  them  debtors,  had  little  to  lose  in  such  a  turn 
and  readily  followed  the  leaders  of  the  exuberant 
West  with  their  limitless  ambitions  of  expansion. 
Let  us  indicate  upon  the  outline  map  the  vote 
of  the  House  of  Representatives  on  the  declaration 


150 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


of  war,  June  4,  1812.  Maine,  which  was  yet  a 
part  of  Massachusetts,  was  divided  into  three 
congressional  districts,  growing  smaller  in  area 
from  the  east;  the  middle  district  from  the  lower 
Androscoggin  to  the  Penobscot  (Map  43a)  voted 
against  the  war,  the  others  in  favor.  New  Hamp 
shire,  which  elected  its  Representatives  on  a  gen 
eral  ticket,  went  three  to  two  for  war,  as  may  be 
shown  by  including  within  the  state  boundaries 
three  marks  of  one  kind  and  two  of  another.  In 
Vermont  the  northwestern  quarter  only  voted 
against.  In  Massachusetts  the  Berkshire  district 
and  that  around  Fitchburg  (Map  41b)  did  not 
vote;  the  eastern  counties,  except  Essex,  in  the 
northeast,  and  Boston  and  vicinity,  voted  for  the 
war,  with  the  rest  of  the  state  against.  Rhode 
Island  and  Connecticut  were  solidly  against.  In 
New  York,  Columbia  County  (Map  lla)  and  the 
west  were  not  represented  in  the  voting,  and  in 
the  remainder  four  sections  are  discernible,  three 
voting  for  and  one  against.  The  former  were:  (1) 
modern  Franklin,  Essex,  Clinton,  Warren,  and  Sara 
toga  Counties;  (2)  Oswego,  Onondaga,  Madison, 
Cortland,  Chenango,  Broome,  Tioga,  and  Chemung; 
(3)  New  York  City  (then  represented  by  Tammany 
Republicans)  and  Long  Island,  except  modern 
Kings  and  Queens  Counties.  The  broad  area  left, 
comprising  about  half  the  state,  was  in  opposition 
(Map  lla).  New  Jersey,  with  a  general  ticket, 
went  four  to  two  against.  Pennsylvania,  east  of 
a  line  drawn  from  the  southwestern  corner  of 
Chemung  County,  New  York,  approximately 
straight  to  the  northern  point  of  Delaware,  showed 
three  to  one  for,  with  all  the  country  west  of  the 
line  also  in  favor.  Delaware  was  against,  likewise 
Maryland,  except  for  three  sections:  (1)  north  of 
the  Choptank  River  on  the  "Eastern  Shore"  of 
Chesapeake  Bay  (Map  10),  and  around  to  Balti 
more  (Map  41b);  (2)  old  Calvert,  Charles,  and  St. 
Marys  Counties  (Map  10);  and  (3)  the  mountain 
ous  region  (Map  41b).  In  Virginia  most  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  Shenandoah  Valley  was  not 
represented  in  the  voting,  but  the  southern  part, 
reaching  to  a  point  some  sixty  or  seventy  miles 
from  the  North  Carolina  border,  together  with 
most  of  what  is  now  West  Virginia,  and  a  strip 
along  the  Potomac  from  almost  the  western  point 


of  Maryland  to  Alexandria,  went  against.  The 
rest  of  the  state  went  for,  except  a  small  area  hi 
the  extreme  south-central  part,  half  of  which  was 
unrepresented  and  half  against  the  war  (Maps 
47  and  57b).  In  North  Carolina  only  the  south- 
central  part  voted  against,  with  two  small  areas, 
in  the  northern  corners,  not  voting.  South  Carolina 
was  entirely  for  war,  like  Tennessee  and  Ohio. 
Georgia,  with  a  general  ticket,  showed  three  dis 
tricts  for,  and  one  not  voting.  Kentucky,  except 
for  a  small  area  near  the  center,  was  for  the  war. 
Contemplating  our  result,  we  observe  that  a  war 
declared  professedly  for  "Free  Trade  and  Sailors' 
Rights"  was  favored  by  nearly  everybody  but  the 
traders  and  the  sailors. 

With  the  aid  of  Maps  28b,  29,  and  31b,  the  stu 
dent  should  locate  all  the  places  and  routes  men 
tioned  in  Bassett,  pp.  321-326,  329-335,  or  any 
other  fairly  detailed  account,  attaching,  when 
possible,  a  date  (year)  to  each  place.  Notice  that 
the  whole  war  was  fought  on  the  rim  of  the  country, 
frontier  and  coast,  leaving  the  great  interior  to 
develop  that  economic  independence  which  the 
war's  necessity  called  forth.  With  farm  lands  un- 
harried  and  manufactures  grown  considerable,  the 
country  speedily  recovered  in  1815.  This  was 
possible,  of  course,  only  in  a  country  of  such  great 
extent  as  ours,  where  neither  economic  nor  polit 
ical  energies  were  wholly  focused  in  a  single  place 
and  which  had  no  all-important  gateway  fortress 
like  Quebec.  The  United  States  as  yet  had  no 
military  key.  Notice  the  advantage  for  defense 
which  the  St.  Lawrence  system  afforded  the  Eng 
lish,  as  it  had  the  French  a  half  century  before. 
It  offered  easy  access  to  the  sea  and  supplies  from 
home,  while,  frostbitten  in  the  winter,  it  held  off 
serious  attacks  until  these  supplies  could  arrive 
securely.  As  long  as  England  held  the  two  pen 
insulas  at  the  ends  of  Lake  Erie,  she  controlled 
the  northwest  of  our  country. 

But  these  could  not  be  captured  and  retained, 
nor  could  such  distant  posts  as  Fort  Mackinac  and 
Detroit  be  held,  without  the  control  of  the  Lakes, 
especially  Lake  Erie.  General  Hull,  whose  prompt 
surrender  was  no  doubt  indiscreet  in  consideration 
of  moral  effect,  had,  nevertheless,  correctly  read 
this  situation  and  earnestly  but  vainly  had  prayed 


151 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


the  government  for  naval  support  early  in  1812. 
Harrison's  invasion  would  have  been  of  no  per 
manent  effect  without  Perry's  victory  at  Put-in- 
Bay.  Dearborn,  who  started  in  1813  from  Sack- 
ett's  Harbor,  might  have  gained  complete  control 
of  Lake  Ontario  if  he  had  not  swung  off  to  York, 
instead  of  attacking  the  stronger  position  of  King 
ston.  McDonough's  victory  off  Plattsburg,  in  1814, 
closed  the  way  to  invasion  from  Canada  in  that 
quarter.  Water  routes  were  then  more  important, 
when  the  alternative  was  threading  the  wilderness. 

"The  importance  of  the  lakes  to  military  opera 
tions  must  always  be  great,"  writes  Admiral 
Mahan,1  "but  it  was  enhanced  in  1812  by  the 
undeveloped  condition  of  land  communication. 
With  the  roads  in  the  state  they  then  were,  the 
movement  of  men,  and  still  more  of  supplies,  was 
vastly  more  rapid  by  water  than  by  land.  Except 
in  winter,  when  iron-bound  snow  covered  the 
ground,  the  routes  of  Upper  Canada  were  well- 
nigh  impassable;  in  spring  and  in  autumn  rains 
wholly  so  as  to  vehicles.  The  mail  from  Montreal 
to  York — now  Toronto — three  hundred  miles,  took 
a  month  in  transit.  .  .  .  The  [British]  Commander 
in  Chief  himself  wrote, 'The  command  of  the  lakes 
enables  the  enemy  to  perform  in  two  days  what  it 
takes  the  troops  from  Kingston  sixteen  to  twenty 
days  of  severe  marching."5 

The  poor  showing  of  the  American  forces  was 
not  due  entirely  to  incompetent  generalship,  but 

1  A.  T.  Mahan,  Sea  Power  in  Its  Relations  to  the  War  of 
1812  (Boston,  1905),  vol.  i,  pp.  301-302. 


to  factors  of  physical  geography  as  well.  The 
trials  of  transportation  overland  long  distances 
through  the  forest  raised  the  price  of  flour  at 
Detroit  by  sixty  dollars  a  barrel.  "These  condi 
tions  partly  account  for  the  ineffectiveness  of  our 
land  campaigns  on  the  frontier;  and  the  demand 
for  internal  improvements,  that  became  strong  after 
the  War  of  1812,  received  an  impetus  from  the 
same  circumstances. " l  It  will  be  noticed  that  under 
these  conditions  the  best  fighting  was  done  by 
seasoned  frontiersmen  under  Harrison  and  Jack 
son.  The  motives  for  attacks  on  Washington  and 
New  Orleans  are  obvious.  Observe  the  value  set 
upon  the  three  gateways  of  Detroit,  Niagara,  and 
the  Champlain  region. 

After  reading  Bassett,  pp.  335-338,  or  the  En 
cyclopedia  Britannica  (llth  edition)  under  "Hart 
ford,"  show  with  the  letters  H.  C.  what  states 
or  communities  sent  representatives  to  the  Hart 
ford  Convention.  Note  the  places  in  Vermont  and 
New  Hampshire  with  relation  to  what  is  said  in 
our  introduction  on  "American  History  and  the 
Map."  In  1813  the  New  York  Assembly  had  been 
won  by  the  Federalists,  but  Governor  Tompkins 
was  re-elected.  Bearing  in  mind  the  great  im 
portance  of  the  New  York  frontier  and  the  situa 
tion  toward  the  east,  consider  what  would  have 
been  the  result  if  a  Democratic  candidate  per 
sonally  less  attractive  than  Tompkins  had  been, 
running  in  that  critical  year. 

1  Albert  H.  Sanford,  Teachers'  Manual  accompanying  the 
Sanford  American  History  Maps,  pp.  36-37. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  17 
THE  SETTLING  OF  THE   MISSISSIPPI  VALLEY 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  341-349,  363-371,  394-396;    Turner,  Rise  of  the  New  West. 
MAPS:  Eastern  United  States  (2  or  3). 


A  STUDY  of  the  military  record  of  the  War  of 
1812,  or  even  of  the  articles  of  peace,  leaves 
one  in  doubt  about  our  claim  to  victory;  but  vic 
tory  is  a  state  of  mind,  and  we  felt  that  we  had 
vindicated  our  rights  among  nations.    One  result 


was  a  wave  of  national  feeling,  general  and  intense, 
if  somewhat  temporary.  Our  nascent  industries, 
which  were  planted  largely  in  the  Northeast,  com 
manded  support  throughout  the  Union  for  their 
necessary  protection  by  high  tariff  in  1816;  this 


152 


may  be  Indicated  by  placing  the  letter  T.  in  those 
states  voting  for,  and  the  letters  A.  T.  in  those 
voting  against,  after  consulting  Map  31a.  Desire 
that  the  nation  should  in  no  future  crisis  be  with 
out  the  aid  of  a  strong  financial  institution  pro 
duced  the  fairly  general  support  of  a  national 
bank  in  the  same  year. 

In  1818  the  northern  boundary  of  the  Louisiana 
purchase  was  settled  with  Great  Britain  (Map  30) 
by  the  artificial  line  of  49°  north  latitude,  inter 
secting  the  natural  mark  of  hills.  But  a  far  more 
irritating  border  controversy  was  that  with  Spain, 
especially  as  to  Florida.  The  colonial  officials 
had  been  unable  or  unwilling  to  prevent  Amelia 
Island  (Map  31b)  being  used  as  a  resort  for  smug 
glers  operating  throughout  the  years  of  embargo, 
nonintercourse  and  war,  or  to  keep  the  Seminoles 
(Map  15b)  from  kidnaping  Georgia  slaves,  or  to 
exclude  the  English  from  their  ports  during  the 
late  hostilities  (Map  Study  No.  15).  After  reading 
J.W. Burgess,  The  Middle  Period  (pp.  25-34),  Allen 
Johnson,  Union  and  Democracy  (pp.  259-265),  or 
Bassett,  pp.  368-371,  writh  preference  in  the  order 
named,  indicate  the  places  mentioned  as  the  scenes 
of  conflict  between  1812  and  1819  (Map  31b).  Us 
ing  Map  30,  show  the  boundary  line  of  1819. 

As  another  evidence  of  national  aggressiveness, 
Maps  32  and  39b  will  show,  in  general,  the  amount 
of  Indian  land  acquired  by  1834.  This  made  the 
settlement  of  the  West  and  Northwest  safe,  and 
helped  to  bring  about  the  admission  of  Indiana, 
Mississippi,  Illinois,  and  Alabama,  which  should  be 
indicated  with  dates  (Map  30) .  The  fact  that  these 
states  in  their  first  fundamental  law  gave  suffrage 
to  practically  all  white  men1  undoubtedly  had  in 
fluence  upon  the  older  communities  in  the  East. 
Comparing  Maps  27  and  30,  note  how  the  Michi 
gan  territory  had  been  enlarged  at  the  time  of  the 
admission  of  Illinois.  From  Map  42  indicate  the 
admission  dates  of  Louisiana,  Missouri  (with  its 
addition  of  1836),  Maine,  Michigan,  Arkansas, 
Florida,  Iowa,  and  Wisconsin. 

1  Three  of  these  states  granted  universal  manhood  suffrage, 
but  Mississippi  required  the  payment  of  a  tax  or  militia  ser 
vice.  "As  enrollment  in  the  militia  was  compulsory  and  the 
qualification  simply  mentioned  'a'  tax  without  fixing  the 
amount,  the  restriction  did  not  amount  to  much  in  practice." — 
K.  H.  Porter,  History  of  the  Suffrage  in  the  United  States 
(Chicago,  1918). 


Turning  to  Maps  40  a  1  and  40  a  2,  the  student 
may  indicate  with  shading  the  area  in  the  old 
Northwest  Territory  settled  by  more  than  six  in 
habitants  to  the  square  mile  in  1830,  and  then  the 
area  similarly  settled  during  the  next  decade.  The 
first  section,  with  the  exception  of  the  Western 
Reserve  (Map  24  and  Map  Study  No.  13),  was 
cleared  and  planted  chiefly  by  pioneers  from  Ken 
tucky  and  the  upland  regions  of  Virginia  and  the 
Carolinas.  Many  came  by  steamboat  or  other 
craft  on  the  Ohio  River,  for  water  routes  became 
increasingly  important  until  about  1850  (see  Maps 
47  and  60),  while  many  others  came  in  by  the 
National  Road  as  it  grew  longer  year  by  year.  The 
road  may  be  traced,  with  the  aid  of  Maps  38  and 
34,  through  Union,  Brownsville,  Wheeling,  Zanes- 
ville,  Columbus,  Indianapolis,  to  Vandalia.  Cin 
cinnati,  their  metropolis,  was  famous  for  their 
corn  and  pork  shipped  downriver  to  New  Orleans. 
(From  Map  Study  No.  14  do  you  remember  any 
early  settlement  along  the  Ohio  made  by  another 
stock?) 

The  later  settlers  came  during  the  "thirties, 
largely  from  New  England  by  way  of  the  Erie 
Canal,  the  route  of  which  should  be  traced.  Locate 
Buffalo  (Map  38),  which  began  its  larger  growth 
when  the  first  lake  steamer,  the  Walk-in-the-Water, 
left  her  wharf  in  1818,  and  developed  after  the 
completion  of  the  canal  in  1825.  Other  towns,  like 
Rochester,  owed  their  prosperity  to  this  waterway, 
which  served  the  fertile  valleys  of  western  New 
York.  Cleveland,  though  founded  in  the  eighteenth 
century  (Map  Study  No.  14),  did  not  become  im 
portant  until  1834,  when  the  Ohio  Canal  (Map  47) 
connected  it  with  the  Ohio  River.  Later  it  was 
developed  as  a  port  for  iron,  coal,  and  oil  for  the 
Pittsburg  district.  With  the  wasteful  farming 
then  practiced  in  nearly  all  parts  of  the  country, 
these  New  Englanders  had  exhausted  much  of 
what  thin  and  stubborn  soil  their  bowldery  slopes 
afforded,  and  had  made  then*  way  either  to  the 
industrial  towns  or  struck  out  to  the  fertile  Western 
plains  and  valleys.  They  now  came  in  such  num 
bers  that  shrewd  observers  prophesied  that  the 
great  center  of  the  West  would  not  be  Cincinnati 
or  St.  Louis,  after  all,  but  Cleveland,  the  Maumee 
town  (Toledo;  Map  47),  or  Chicago,  which  had 


153 


been  begun  in  1830  at  Fort  Dearborn,  finally,  in 
the  early  'forties,  agreeing  upon  the  last.  These 
emigrants  had,  by  1840,  set  up  scores  of  towns, 
among  them  some  which  became  famous  as 
educational  centers,  like  Oberlin,  Ohio  (Oberlin); 
Ann  Arbor,  Michigan  (U.  of  M.);  Crawfordsville, 
Indiana  (Wabash);  Galesburg  (Knox),  Beloit 
(Beloit),  and  Rockford,  Illinois  (Rockford);  and 
Madison,  Wisconsin  (U.  of  W.),  which,  if  the 
student  has  sufficient  time,  may  be  located  from 
an  indexed  modern  map  such  as  those  in  an 
encyclopedia. 

Show,  from  Map  34,  how,  in  1830,  one  could  have 
gone,  perhaps,  in  a  Conestoga  wagon,  from  Mary 
land  to  the  Tombeckbee  (or  Tombigbee)  Valley 
in  Alabama,  or  likewise,  from  Maine  to  Erie, 
Pennsylvania,  indicating  a  few  important  places 
passed  through  on  each  route.  The  first  important 
stone  road  in  America  had  been  finished  in  1794, 
between  Philadelphia  and  Lancaster,  Pennsylvania. 
Draw  in  lines  to  represent  three  canals  that  you 
judge  to  have  been  important  in  connection  with 
this  western  emigration.  But  the  trend  of  popu 
lation  in  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
will  be  much  more  vividly  illustrated  by  tracing, 
from  articles  in  an  encyclopedia  of  American 
biography  (Appleton's,  Lamb's,  or  the  National), 
the  "residence  line" — i.e.,  the  general  direction 
taken  in  selecting  a  home — by  five  of  the  following: 
S.  A.  Douglas,  Abraham  Lincoln's  father,  Lewis 
Cass,  T.  H.  Benton,  Henry  Clay,  S.  P.  Chase, 
Zachary  Taylor,  Hugh  McCulloch,  Andrew  John 
son,  J.  W.  Grimes,  James  K.  Polk,  N.  P.  Tall- 
madge,  your  own  parents  or  grandparents.  Place 
names  may  be  found  in  the  index  and  maps  of 
any  large  atlas  or  general  encyclopedia. 

The  foreign  immigration  of  the  later  'forties  and 
'fifties  was  chiefly  of  Irish  and  German  stock.  The 
former  seemed  to  pr^fer  the  settled  East,  but  the 
latter  took  uo  their  way  to  the  Middle  West, 


centering  in  such  places  as  St.  Louis,  Milwaukee, 
Cincinnati,  etc.  W.  E.  Dodd  has  an  article 
in  the  American  Historical  Review,  Vol.  XVI, 
pp.  774-788,  maintaining  that  the  presence  of 
Germans,  enthusiastic  supporters  of  the  doctrines 
of  liberty  and  nationalism,  who  came  to  northern 
Illinois  because  of  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad's 
sale  of  lands,  made  Lincoln's  election  possible  in 
1860.  In  1861  Union  leaders  kept  Missouri  by 
the  support  of  Germans. 

Of  course,  all  western  emigrants  took  advantage 
of  the  railroads  as  fast  as  they  became  available, 
but  they  played  but  small  part  in  the  first  half  of 
the  century,  for  it  was  not  until  about  1850  that 
the  integration  of  local  roads  into  trunk  lines  was 
to  any  considerable  extent  accomplished.  They 
were  preferred  to  rivers  and  canals  throughout  the 
North,  because  they  could  be  used  in  the  cold 
weather;  in  the  middle  'forties  winter  travelers 
went  from  New  York  to  Albany  by  ship  to 
Boston  and  overland  by  rail.  Trace  the  routes 
of  three  early  railroads  (Map  47)  built  to  con 
nect  waterways;  three  typical  short  lines,  each 
of  less  than  a  hundred  miles  in  length;  and  two 
longer  lines. 

From  the  following  table  show,  with  stars,  ap 
proximately  the  center  of  population  as  determined 
in  each  decade  to  1860,  noticing  the  more  rapid 
westward  course  after  1830,  due  to  better  transpor 
tation  ways,  and  the  crossing  of  the  Alleghanies 
by  1850: 


Year 
1790 
1800 
1810 
1820 
1830 
1840 
1850 
1860 


North  Latitude 
39°  16' 
39°  16' 
39°  11' 
39°    6' 
39° 
39° 
39° 
39° 


West  Longitude 
76°  11' 
76°  58' 
77°  37' 
78°  33' 
79°  17' 
80°  18' 
81°  19' 
82°  49' 


MAP   STUDY    No.  18 
SECTIONALISM:    ECONOMIC  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  EAST 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  384-388,  399-401,  407-410;   McDonald,  Jacksonian  Democracy. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 


A?  might  have  been  expected,  the  settling  of 
the  Mississippi  Valley  was  bound  to  introduce 
new  controversies  into  American  politics.  From 
the  days  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the  West 
and  the  East  were  sensible  of  a  conflict  of  interest. 
As  early  as  1634  the  Watertown  protest  (Map 
Study  No.  6)  had  pointed  out  that  political  repre 
sentation  was  likely  to  lag.  behind  the  westward 
spread  of  population,  and  this  had  been  the  peren 
nial  theme  of  upland  farmers  in  the  South.  Bacon's 
Rebellion  of  1676  (Map  Study  No.  5)  was  an  early 
evidence  that  the  frontier  demanded  more  protec 
tion  than  the  safe  and  comfortable  East  thought 
necessary,  a  matter  of  dispute  in  the  nation  till 
long  after  the  Civil  War.  The  West,  glorying  in 
its  faith,  borrowed  heavily  from  the  East,  but  was 
resentful  when  pressed  by  unsympathetic  creditors 
desiring  stringent  laws  against  cheapening  the 
legal  tender  (Map  Study  No.  13).  The  West  was 
clamorous  for  government  aid  in  building  ways  of 
transportation,  which  the  East  was  slow  to  favor. 
The  West  eagerly  desired  more  population  to  de 
velop  its  prosperity,  and  urged  with  tireless  zeal 
that  the  government  lands  beyond  the  Appalach 
ians  be  virtually  given  away  to  settlers.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  East  believed  that  this  common 
property  acquired  by  the  blood  and  treasure  of 
all  should  be  cashed  in  for  the  benefit  of  the  old 
states  as  well  as  new,  and  employers  in  the  cities 
near  the  coast  were  especially  averse  to  making  the 
West  more  attractive  to  their  mill  hands. 

The  first  national  question  conspicuously  to  re 
veal  the  opposition  of  the  sections  after  the  con 
clusion  of  the  second  war  with  England  was  that 
of  internal  improvements  proposed  in  the  Bonus 
bill  of  1817.  Using  a  large  B.  to  indicate  those 
states  which  voted  favorably  through  their  Sena 


tors,  A.  B.  for  those  voting  against,  and  leaving 
unmarked  those  divided  or  not  voting,  the  result 
of  the  vote  may  be  illustrated  from  the  following 
data:  For — New  York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylva 
nia,  Maryland,  Delaware,  Virginia,  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Kentucky,  Louisiana;  against — Massachusetts  (in 
cluding  Maine),  Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Connec 
ticut,  South  Carolina,  Tennessee.  New  England 
was  as  yet  against  the  development  of  transpor 
tation  to  the  West. 

The  antipathy  was  persistent.  During  the  later 
'twenties  Senator  Benton  of  Missouri  repeatedly 
introduced  his  Graduation  bill  to  reduce  the  price 
of  government  Western  lands  to  twenty-five  cents 
an  acre,  and,  to  settlers,  actually  giving  outright 
parcels  which  were  not  bid  in  when  offered  at 
fifty  cents.  All  land  unsold  at  twenty-five  cents 
after  a  year  was  to  be  given  to  the  states  wherein 
it  lay.  Using  the  letters  G.  and  A.  G.  (preferably 
in  a  new  color),  there  may  be  shown,  as  before, 
the  result  of  the  test  vote  on  May  7,  1830:  For — 
North  Carolina,  Georgia,  Indiana,  Kentucky,  Ten 
nessee,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  and  Mis 
souri;  against — Maine,  Vermont,  Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  New 
Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware.  The  East  was 
much  more  populous,  and  the  measure  failed  in 
the  House.  The  Eastern  Whigs,  who  had  been 
suspected  by  the  Westerners,  took  an  Indiana 
man,  W.  H.  Harrison,  as  their  presidential  candi 
date  in  1840,  and,  as  is  shown  on  Map  40b2, 
captured  all  of  that  section  except  the  incorrigible 
states  of  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  Arkansas.  In 
1841  a  permanent  pre-emption  law  was  passed 
giving  a  special  low  price  to  squatters,  but  the 
West  was  not  wholly  satisfied  until  the  home 
stead  law  of  1862.  It  will  be  remembered  that 


155 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


it  was  the  resolution  offered  by  Senator  Foote 
of  Connecticut  to  suspend  for  a  time  the  sale 
of  Western  public  land  that  brought  forth  in 
support  Webster's  great  speeches  of  January, 
1830.  His  first  antagonist  was  Benton,  but  he 
was  soon  supplanted  by  Hayne  of  South  Caro 
lina,  showing  that  the  South,  feeling  itself  also  an 
object  of  discrimination  by  the  more  populous 
Northeast,  was  anxious  to  join  hands  with  the 
West. 

The  slave  system  of  the  South,  where  the  plan 
tations  were  growing  larger,  did  not  offer  oppor 
tunity  for  the  immigrant,  and  the  section  was 
conscious  of  a  relative  decline  in  population.  This 
condition  threatened  to  leave  it  at  the  mercy  of 
the  manufacturing  East,  which,  with  its  power 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  could  carry 
measures  of  protective  tariff.  Shading  the  areas 
lightly  with  lead  pencil,  the  student  should  in 
dicate  the  vote  on  the  Tariff  bill  of  April  22,  1828 
(Map  35b),  making  mental  note  of  the  transfer 
of  certain  interests  in  New  England  from  shipping 
to  manufacturing,  the  gain  of  the  opposition  in 
Tennessee  and  Missouri,  and  its  loss  in  western 
Virginia,  which  was  disaffected  toward  the  govern 
ment  at  Richmond.  With  the  letters  F.  and  A.  F., 
show  the  states  for  and  against  the  Force  bill 
(Map  39a2). 

Calhoun  and  other  Southern  leaders  labored  ear 
nestly  in  the  early  'thirties  to  bind  the  West  to  the 
South,  and  the  prospect  of  the  alliance  seemed  to 
be  favored  by  the  circumstance  that  Northwestern 
farmers  supplied  the  Southern  plantations  with 
foodstuffs,  mules,  and  horses,  floated  along  the 
river  routes  on  rafts.  Do  you  recall  ever  having 
read  of  a  young  man,  afterward  very  prominent, 
who,  in  1831,  helped  to  pilot  a  flatboat  down  the 
Sangamon,  Illinois,  and  Mississippi  Rivers  to  New 
Orleans  (Map  34)? 

But  the  West  could  not  be  single-minded  on 
this  matter.  The  East,  unlike  the  South,  came  to 
offer  support  to  internal  improvement,  and  to  a 
tariff  on  raw  wool,  if  the  West *  would  help  pro 
tect  its  manufactures.  The  farmer  of  the  old 
Northwest  depended  on  the  East  for  manufactured 
goods,  which  he  received  by  way  of  the  canals  and 

1  See  introductory  essay  on  American  History  and  the  Map. 


turnpike  roads,  and  which  he  paid  for  with  his  bills 
of  exchange  on  the  Southern  planters.  As  the 
Eastern  cities  grew,  he  doubtless  wrished  that  he 
could  cheaply  and  directly  send  his  produce  to 
their  market,  which  would  in  some  respects  be 
more  satisfactory  than  the  South.  The  railroads 
of  the  'fifties  gave  him  this  opportunity,  and  did 
much  to  set  his  allegiance  toward  the  Union  rather 
than  the  Confederacy.  The  old  political  division 
based  on  longitude  now  disappeared;  manufactur 
ing  spread  westward  and  both  regions  drew  a 
plentiful  supply  of  labor  from  the  growing  im 
migration.  In  contrast  to  the  attitude  of  Foote 
and  Webster,  thirty  years  before,  the  Homestead 
bill  of  1862  was  brought  in  by  an  Easterner, 
Senator  Justin  S.  Morrill  of  Vermont.  In  Map 
Study  No.  17  we  saw  the  few  short  railroads  be 
yond  the  Alleghanies  in  1850  (Map  47).  Turn 
now  to  Map  49  and  notice  the  astonishing  develop 
ment  in  the  decade  following.  Indicate  the  rail 
road  route  from  Syracuse  to  Milwaukee,  and  from 
Pittsburg  to  St.  Louis.  One  historian  has  re 
marked:  "If  the  great  American  novel  is  ever  writ 
ten,  I  hazard  the  guess  that  its  plot  will  be  woven 
around  the  theme  of  American  transportation,  for 
that  has  been  the  vital  factor  in  the  national  de 
velopment  of  the  United  States.  Every  problem 
in  the  building  of  the  Republic  has  been,  in  the 
last  analysis,  a  problem  in  transportation."  1  Al 
though  in  this  pronouncement  there  is  enough  of 
hyperbole  to  make  it  striking,  there  is  also  enough 
of  truth  to  start  a  train  of  very  useful  reflection. 

From  Map  53  indicate  with  Roman  numerals 
the  comparative  importance  of  the  six  states  which, 
by  1860,  produced  more  than  $75,000,000  each  in 
value  of  manufactures.  Locate  Pawtucket,  Rhode 
Island  (Map  9),  where,  in  1790,  Samuel  Slater 
erected  the  first  complete  cotton-spinning  mill  in 
America;  Lowell,  Massachusetts  (Map  38),  founded 
in  1826  as  the  first  of  the  new  "mill  towns,"  and 
named  in  honor  of  Francis  Cabot  Lowell,  who  had, 
in  1814,  set  up  at  Waltham  the  first  plant  in 
America  to  turn  raw  cotton  into  finished  cloth. 
Most  foreign  travelers  were  surprised  and  delighted 
with  the  comfortable  living  and  intelligence  of  the 


'    1  A.  B.  Hulbert,  The  Paths  of  Inland  Commerce  (New  Haven, 
1920),  p.  7. 


156 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


farmers' daughters  who  "manned  "these  mills  in  the 
'thirties  and  'forties,  before  they  were  supplanted 
by  the  Irish  and  French-Canadian  immigrants. 
Locate  Oneida  County,  New  York  (Map  11  a),  the 
center  of  early  textile  manufacture  in  that  state. 
Had  we  time  to  make  a  more  elaborate  indication, 
we  would  see  that  the  early  manufacturing  towns 
were  developed  beside  waterfalls,  as  near  the  sea 
as  possible.  Steam  and  railroads  did  not  free  the 
manufacturer  from  this  necessity  until  nearly  the 
middle  of  the  century. 

Locate  Richmond,  Virginia  (Map  38),  near 
which  was  found  much  of  the  soft-coal  supply  for 
the  United  States,  early  in  the  nineteenth  century; 
the  Lehigh  Valley,  in  northeastern  Pennsylvania, 
served  by  two  canals  (Map  38),  and  whose  "stone 
coal,"  or  anthracite,  began  to  be  used  in  industry 
about  1820,  though  not  for  smelting  iron  for 
another  eighteen  years;  the  Pittsburg  district 
and  southeastern  Ohio,  which  were  becoming  in 
dustrially  important  just  before  the  Civil  War 
by  reason  of  their  growing  production  of  soft  coal 
and  iron;  New  Bedford  (Map  47),  whose  whalers 
were  so  numerous  in  1845  as  to  make  it  the  fourth 


port  of  the  country  in  tonnage;  and  Titus ville, 
Pennsylvania,  about  thirty  miles  east  of  Meadville 
(Map  34),  where,  in  1859,  Col.  E.L.  Drake  sank  the 
first  oil  well  in  America.  The  kerosene  derived  from 
the  petroleum  of  northwestern  Pennsylvania  sup 
planted  in  the  public  demand  the  whale  oil  from 
New  Bedford  and  the  candles  from  Cincinnati. 

On  the  back  of  your  map  sheet  devise  a  simple 
graphic  chart  which  will  show  the  curve  of  immigra 
tion  according  to  the  following  table: 

Decade  preceding 

1830 143,000 

1840 600,000 

1850 1,700,000 

1860 2,600,000 

On  another  similar  chart  show  the  curve  of  per 
centage  of  urban  population  in  the  country: 
1790—3.35%;  1800—3.97%;  1810—4.93%;  1820— 
4.93%;  1830—6.72%;  1840—8.52%;  1850—12.49%; 
1860—16.13%.  It  will  be  noticed  that  cities  grew 
four  times  as  important  in  the  first  six  decades  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  but  that  the  people  of  the 
United  States  were  still  overwhelmingly  agricul 
tural  in  their  interests. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  19 

THE  PLANTATION  EMPIRE  AND  THE  ANTI-SLAVERY  CRUSADE 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  350  -352,  371-375,  428-431;  Hart,  Slavery  and  Abolition. 
MAP:  Eastern  United  States. 


WHEN,  on  the  eve  of  the  Civil  War,  that  dis 
cerning  traveler,  Frederick  Law  Olmstead, 
summed  up  his  observation  of  the  South  in  his 
book,  The  Cotton  Kingdom,  he  included  a  map  of 
that  broad  domain,  based  chiefly  on  the  census  of 
1850,  the  main  features  of  which  we  may  now  re 
produce.  Starting  from  New  Orleans,  one  notices 
an  area  which  represents  the  field  of  heaviest  pro 
duction,  about  fifty  miles  broad,  along  the  western 
bank  of  the  Mississippi,  almost  to  the  boundary 
of  Missouri  and  branching  up  the  Red  and  the 
Arkansas.  On  the  eastern  bank  this  strip  is  twice 
as  broad,  and,  turning  east,  to  include  the  whole  of 
southwestern  Tennessee  and  northern  Mississippi, 


runs  diagonally  to  southern  Alabama  and  across 
through  central  Georgia  and  western  South  Caro 
lina.  The  lower  valleys  of  the  Brazos  and  the 
Colorado,  in  Texas  (Map  41a),  were  cultivated 
with  similar  intensity.  The  rest  of  Mississippi 
and  Alabama  should  be  shaded  to  show  a  little 
less  importance  in  the  cotton  crop,  as  should  also 
the  area  of  Arkansas  and  Louisiana,  except  the 
northern  and  southern  portions.  A  belt  beginning 
about  seventy  miles  from  the  Gulf  coast  and 
stretching  back  a  hundred  and  twenty-five  or 
fifty  miles  connected  this  region  with  the  Texas 
valleys  we  have  shown. 
As  loyal  allies  should  be  indicated  the  dominions 


157 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


of  tobacco,  rice,  and  sugar.  The  parts  of  the 
former,  as  was  the  case  with  some  states  in  old 
Germany,  were  not  contiguous,  but  the  interests 
of  all  those  which  lay  south  of  the  Ohio  and 
the  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  (Map  37  and  Map 
Study  No.  5)  were  largely  identical.  Maryland, 
from  the  Chesapeake  to  the  narrowest  part,  was 
one  province;  Virginia,  east  of  the  mountains  (ex 
cept  a  narrow  strip  along  the  Potomac  and  the 
coast),  was  another,  which  curved  as  far  south  as 
central  North  Carolina;  northwestern  Tennessee, 
including  the  central  part  of  the  Cumberland  Val 
ley,  together  with  all  western  Kentucky,  was  an 
other;  and  the  valley  of  the  Missouri  as  far  as 
Independence  (Map  47),  the  fourth.  From  Map  53 
may  be  shown  the  areas  occupied  by  rice  and  sugar. 

Such  was  the  plantation  empire  resting  on  the 
broad  backs  of  the  slaves.  Its  freight  highways 
were  the  rivers,  as  is  suggested  in  Maps  47  and 
60.  Its  society  was  stratified  into  castes  in  which 
the  owners  of  the  large  plantations,  on  the  river 
bottoms,  though  few  in  number,  made  up  the  ruling 
group,  taking  a  lively  and  intelligent  interest  in 
politics  themselves  and  speaking  also  through  the 
clergymen,  professors,  physicians,  and  editors, 
allied  with  their  families.  Education  came  to  be 
forbidden  to  the  slaves;  there  were  few  free  schools, 
except  those  kept  from  charity  for  the  poor.  But 
the  master  class  were  devoted  to  the  classics  and 
religion,  and  supported  many  colleges  for  the  edu 
cation  of  their  sons.  To  emphasize  the  fact  that 
the  leading  Southerners  before  the  war  were  well 
schooled,  let  us  locate  some  of  the  leading 
institutions. 

The  University  of  Virginia,  founded  in  1819  by 
Thomas  Jefferson  at  Charlottesville  (Map  58b), 
had  perhaps  the  widest  reputation  and  the  highest 
prestige  of  all,  but  in  the  same  state  there  were 
eight  other  colleges  of  excellent  standing.  Lex 
ington  (Map  58b)  was  the  seat  of  Washington  Col 
lege  (1813),  which  after  the  war  was  to  enlarge 
its  name  in  honor  of  its  president,  Robert  E.  Lee, 
and  the  Virginia  Military  Institute  (1839),  where 
"Stonewall"  Jackson  taught  in  the  'fifties.  The 
first  state  university  in  the  nation  was  chartered  in 
1784  at  Athens,  Georgia  (Map  59a),  but  the  first 
in  actual  teaching  was  that  of  North  Carolina, 


patterned  after  Princeton  in  1789,  at  Chapel  Hill, 
about  half  way  between  Greensboro  and  Raleigh 
(Map  58b),  and  which  furnished  twenty  generals 
to  the  Confederate  armies.  After  much  debate 
between  the  coast  and  mountain  districts,  the 
College  of  South  Carolina  had  been  located,  in 
1810,  in  Columbia,  at  the  head  of  navigation  on 
the  Congaree  (Maps  59a  and  47).  In  1819,  about 
the  time  of  the  admission  of  Alabama  and  Mis 
sissippi,  Congress  gave  to  each  of  these  new  com 
monwealths  a  grant  of  land  which  served  as  the 
basis  of  support  of  two  state  universities,  that  of 
the  former  opening  at  Tuscaloosa  (Map  59a)  in 
1831,  and  that  of  the  latter  at  Oxford  (in  the 
north  central  part  of  the  state  about  fifty  miles 
from  the  border)  in  1848.  These  two  antebellum 
institutions  needed  no  other  certification  than  the 
fact  that  for  twenty-four  years  the  distinguished 
Dr.  Frederick  A.  P.  Barnard  played  an  important 
part  in  their  teaching  and  direction.  In  Alabama 
there  were  nine  other  colleges.  Beyond  the  Alle- 
ghanies,  Transylvania  University,  at  Lexington, 
Kentucky  (Map  19b),  was  founded  in  1798,  almost 
the  first  in  the  Mississippi  Valley.1  Here  Henry 
Clay  was  a  professor  from  1804  to  1807,  and  here 
President  Horace  Holley  (1818-27)  and  others 
established  Lexington's  claim  to  be  the  "Athens 
of  the  West."  Jefferson  Davis  was  an  alumnus 
of  Transylvania.  The  leaders  of  the  Old  South, 
the  "slavocrats,"  were  cultivated  men. 

But  the  great  majority  of  Southern  wrhites  did 
not  hold  slaves.  The  introduction  of  the  cotton 
gin  had  made  short-staple  cotton  profitable,  and 
this  could  be  raised  on  soil  farther  upland  than  the 
variety  previously  grown.  Planter  capitalists 
offered  prices  that  practically  forced  the  farmers 
to  sell  and  move  either  to  the  Northwest  (Map 
Study  No.  17)  or  to  the  higher  and  less  fertile 
slopes  nearer  by.  In  these  latter  districts  they 
played  a  losing  game,  for  in  the  old  South  the  op 
portunity  was  small  for  the  man  who  had  no  slaves. 
The  hilly  area  shown  in  Map  61,  together  with 
some  of  western  North  Carolina,  northwestern 
Georgia,  and  northeastern  Alabama,2  as  well  as 

1  This  distinction  belongs  to  Washington  College,  a  small  in 
stitution,  chartered  in  Washington  County,  Tennessee,  in  1795. 

2  The  "piney  woods"    in  southern   Alabama  were   also  in 
habited  by  the  poorer  whites. 


158 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


that  of  northern  Arkansas  and  southern  Missouri, 
was  peopled  by  those  who  had  reason  to  dislike 
the  plantation  empire,  and  may  be  indicated  as 
regions  of  some  dissent.  But  they  naturally  had 
inferior  leadership,  they  feared  any  change  which 
would  make  the  negro  more  nearly  their  social 
equal,  and  they  half  believed  the  earnest  and 
sincere  defenders  of  slavery,  who  declared  it  good 
for  everybody.  Only  West  Virginia  (Maps  58b 
and  61)  broke  away  during  the  war. 

The  rulers  of  the  "empire"  had  not  much  to 
fear  from  foes  within,  but  they  were  bitterly  re 
sentful  of  interference  from  without.  If,  following 
Map  42,  the  student  will  indicate  the  dates  of 
emancipation  in  the  Northern  states,  he  will  notice 
that  there  slavery  had  disappeared  by  1827,  except 
for  a  dwindling  number  in  New  Jersey.  Then 
outline  the  boundary  of  slave-state  area  as  it  ex 
isted  on  March  4,  1845,  the  day  after  Florida's 
admission.  Slaves  were  produced  in  Kentucky 
and  Virginia  beyond  the  need  of  the  tobacco 
planters,  and  were  taken  south  to  the  cotton,  rice, 
and  sugar  lands  by  routes  five  of  which  may  be 
shown  from  the  map.  These  masters,  feeling  them 
selves  the  victims  of  unpleasant  circumstances, 
often  parted  with  their  slaves  with  genuine  re 
luctance.  Economic  selfishness  but  reinforced 
their  natural  human  sympathy  in  caring  for  their 
slaves,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  darkies 
carried  to  the  sweltering  fields  of  the  lower  South 


have  been  represented  as  singing  fondly  of  their 
old  Kentucky  home,  or  praying  some  kind  fate  to 
carry  them  back  to  "Ole  Virginny."  By  which 
route  was  Uncle  Tom  transported? 

It  was  this  traffic,  chiefly,  which  roused  Northern 
sentiment  to  the  formation  of  abolition  societies. 
In  the  last  of  the  'forties  societies  existed  along  the 
New  England  coast  and  the  Connecticut  River, 
central  and  western  New  York,  southeastern  and 
northwestern  Pennsylvania,  Ohio  (except  the  cen 
tral  and  northwestern  parts),  Indiana  (except 
along  the  Ohio  River),  and  along  the  Illinois  and 
Rock  Rivers  (Map  34)  in  Illinois.  After  1833  the 
slave  who  reached  Canada  was  free  by  British 
statute,  and  there  were  many  sympathizers  in  the 
North  who  were  willing  to  aid  him  on  his  way. 
Their  efforts,  of  course,  were  secret,  by  reason  of 
the  fugitive-slave  law,  and  their  system  came  to 
be  known  as  the  "Underground  Railroad."  From 
Map  41b  show  five  important  routes.  Notice  the 
connection  with  abolition  societies;  comparison 
with  Map  Study  No.  17  will  show  the  effect  of  New 
England  settlement,  and  with  Map  Study  No.  7 
the  influence  of  the  Quakers.  Locate  Warsaw, 
in  Wyoming  County,  New  York  (Map  lla),  where 
the  Liberty  Party  was  formed;  the  places  of  resi 
dence  of  Gerrit  Smith,  Wendell  Phillips,  and 
Harriet  Beecher  Stowe;  six  otl^er  places  of  interest 
in  the  abolition  controversy,  giving  in  a  key  your 
reasons  for  the  selection. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  20 

MANIFEST  DESTINY:    SETTLEMENT,  DIPLOMACY,  AND  WAR  CARRY 

THE  BOUNDARY  TO  THE  PACIFIC 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  419-422,  433-450;    Garrison,  Westward  Extension. 
MAPS:  Western  United  States;   Texas  and  Mexico;   United  States. 


OORDER  Forays  in  the  Northeast.— The  United 
*~*  States  and  the  British  Empire  have  lived  in 
peace  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  and  their  mu 
tual  good  will  has  grown  most  cordial ;  but  relations 
have  not  been  unmarked,  at  times,  with  serious 


irritation,  for  we  disliked  the  "mother  country's" 
aristocratic  institutions  as  well  as  her  reputed 
eagerness  for  land.  In  1837,  the  year  of  young 
Victoria's  accession  to  the  throne,  agitators  in 
Upper  and  Lower  Canada  set  up  a  standard  of 


159 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


rebellion,  in  hope  of  more  popular  self-government,1 
a  movement  heartily  applauded  on  this  side  of 
the  St.  Lawrence  and  the  Niagara.  Enthusiasts 
from  northern  and  western  New  York  crossed  the 
border  and  took  part  in  the  engagements  at  the 
windmill  opposite  Ogdensburg  and  at  Navy  Island 
in  the  Niagara  River.  In  retaliation,  loyal  Cana 
dians  crossed  to  the  New  York  shore  and  burned 
a  ship,  the  Caroline,  which  had  been  used  in  this 
illicit  ferriage,  stirring  up  such  animosity  that  the 
War  Department  reinforced  Fort  Montgomery  at 
the  point  of  our  farthest  claim  on  Lake  Cham- 
plain,  near  Rouse's  Point  (Map  47). 

A  controversy  over  the  Aroostook  Country 
(Map  43a),  claimed  by  Maine  and  by  New  Bruns 
wick,  dating  back  to  the  vague  boundary  arrange 
ments  of  1783,  now  grew  more  acute.  There  were 
altercations  in  the  forest  between  opposing  woods 
men,  and  in  1838  Maine  built  forts  along  the  border, 
such  as  Fort  Fairfield,  on  the  Aroostook  River,  not 
far  west  of  its  juncture  with  the  St.  John.  The 
lower  portion  of  our  eastern  boundary  had  been 
agreed  upon,  in  1798,  by  a  joint  commission 
planned  for  in  Jay's  Treaty,  but  Great  Britain 
maintained  that  the  northern  watershed,  mentioned 
in  1783,  began  at  Mars  Hill,  while  the  Americans 
argued  for  the  highlands  where  the  Metis  River 
has  its  source.  The  treaty  of  1815  provided  for 
other  commissions;  but,  these  failing,  the  king  of 
the  Netherlands  as  referee,  in  1831,  drew  an  arti 
ficial  boundary  line  unsatisfactory  to  this  country. 
There  was  some  question  as  to  what  was  the  source 
of  the  Connecticut,  and  as  to  the  exact  position  of 
the  forty-fifth  parallel  of  latitude.  The  Webster- 
Ashburton  Treaty  of  1842  drew  the  line  accepted, 
which  made  the  St.  John  the  boundary  for  a  con 
siderable  distance,  determined  the  highland  ridge 
and  the  Connecticut,  and  took  the  American  view 
of  latitude.  Oddly  enough,  an  accurate  survey 
would  have  left  Fort  Montgomery  on  British  soil, 
and  it  was  derisively  called  "Fort  Blunder,"  but 
now  transfer  of  the  necessary  parcel  was  amicably 
arranged.  All  this  can  be  illustrated  on  the  map. 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  a  settlement  of  the 

1  The  revolutionists  complained  especially  of  an  arrogant 
ruling  clique  of  United  Empire  Loyalists  in  Upper  Canada 
(Map  Study  No.  12). 


Creole  question  (Map  42)  was  provided  for  by 
arbitration. 

Texas,  the  "Lone  Star  State" — In  Map  Study 
No.  15  we  saw  that  Spain,  exasperated  by  Jeffer 
son's  purchase  of  Louisiana,  insisted  on  the  Red 
as  her  northeastern  limit,  while  the  diplomats  in 
Washington,  upon  a  hopeful  reading  of  the  records, 
claimed  to  the  Rio  Grande.  The  treaty  of  1819 
(Map  Study  No.  17)  brought  a  peaceful  com 
promise,  but  American  pioneers  now,  as  before 
1803  (Map  Study  No.  15),  went  on  before  the  flag 
and  made  settlements  in  Texas.  In  1821  Stephen 
F.  Austin,  who,  after  graduating  from  Transyl 
vania  University  (Map  Study  No.  19),  had  served 
as  a  territorial  legislator  from  Missouri,  and  as  a 
territorial  judge  in  Arkansas,  secured  from  the 
new  Mexican  government  a  confirmation  of  a  land 
grant  which  his  father  had  received  from  Spain. 
Thereupon  he  gathered  a  company  of  adventurers 
and  went  south  to  form  a  colony  on  the  Brazos 
River,  where  he  gave  law  with  patriarchal  authority 
and  where  the  principal  town,  San  Felipe  de  Austin 
(Map  4 la),  was  named  in  his  honor.  The  immi 
grants  from  the  United  States  increased  in  number 
until,  in  1827,  the  apprehensive  Mexican  officials, 
disregarding  the  old  Spanish  boundary  of  Texas 
(Maps  41a  and  45a),  joined  it  with  Coahuila,  a 
strictly  Mexican  province  stretching  across  the 
middle  portion  of  the  Rio  Grande  to  the  central 
part  of  the  country. 

A  growing  discontent  with  this  unfriendly  gov 
ernment  among  the  Americans,  who  especially 
disliked  laws  against  Protestant  worship  and  sla 
very,  finally  led  to  armed  rebellion  in  1835.  The 
command  soon  settled  upon  Sam  Houston,  an  In 
dian  agent  from  Tennessee,  who  had  come  to  live 
in  Nacogdoches  (Map  4 la),  and  a  bitter  war  was 
fought.  At  first  unsuccessful,  the  Texans  were 
nerved  to  desperate  resistance  by  the  tragic 
butchery  of  the  defenders  of  the  Alamo  Mission 
fort  at  San  Antonio,  among  them  such  popular 
heroes  as  Capt.  James  Bowie  and  the  picturesque 
Col.  Davy  Crockett.  Finally,  at  San  Jacinto,  on 
an  arm  of  Galveston  Bay,  the  Mexicans  were  de 
feated,  and  their  general,  Santa  Anna,  accepted 
the  Rio  Grande  as  the  boundary  of  an  independent 
state,  though  the  whole  arrangement  was  soon  dis- 


160 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


avowed  in  the  city  of  Mexico.  The  capital  of  Texas 
was  located  at  the  new  town  of  Houston  (1836), 
but  in  1839  removed  to  Austin  (1838),  where  it  has 
remained,  except  for  three  years  after  1842,  when 
President  Houston  brought  it  back  to  the  place 
of  his  residence  and  name.1 

Although  the  actual  authority  of  Texas  was  never 
extended  beyond  the  Neuces,  the  Texas  congress 
defined  the  western  boundary  of  the  republic  as 
the  Rio  Grande  to  its  source  and  thence  north  to  the 
forty-second  parallel,  about  the  latitude  of  Boston, 
while  the  Arkansas  and  the  meridian  of  its  source 
were  taken  as  the  eastern  and  northern  limits  as 
far  as  the  treaty  line  of  1819.  The  citizens  of  the 
"Lone  Star  Republic"  petitioned  for  annexation 
to  their  home  land,  but  antislavery  opposition  in 
the  Northern  states  delayed  the  project,  and  it 
was  not  until  March  1,  1845,  when  reports  of 
British  influence  in  Texas  had  aroused  some  ap 
prehension,  that  the  republic  was  invited  by  joint 
resolution  of  Congress  to  be  a  state.  The  an 
nexation  was  completed  on  December  29th  of  the 
same  year,  Texas  being  the  only  state  ever  admitted 
without  passing  through  a  territorial  stage,  or 
being  for  a  time  under  the  jurisdiction  of  another 
state  government.2 

The  Trappers  and  the  Far  Northwest. — Reference 
to  Map  Study  No.  15  will  refresh  our  memory  of 
the  routes  of  Lewis  and  Clark,  1803-06.  Their 
reports  of  broad  beaver  meadows,  the  buffaloes 
of  the  plains,  and  the  teeming  animal  life  of  the 
mountain  woods  aroused  Americans  to  emulate 
the  lucrative  business  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  and 
North  West  Companies  operating  under  British 
license  in  western  Canada.  John  Jacob  Astor, 
having  amassed  a  fortune  in  thrifty  trade  with  the 
Mohawk  Indians  and  the  English  companies,  pur 
chased  the  Mackinaw  Company,  and  thus,  with 
his  post  at  the  strait  that  leads  from  Lake  Michigan 
(Map  28a),  had  acquired  ascendancy  on  the  Amer 
ican  side  of  the  Great  Lake  Basin.  In  1808  he 

1  The  capital  was  set  up  for  a  few  months  in  1838  at  Columbia. 
In  1839  it  was  temporarily  at  Washington. 

2  Lincoln  maintained,  in  his  first  message  to  Congress,  that 
Texas  was  the  only  state  that  had  ever  been  sovereign:    "The 
original  ones  passed  into  the  Union  even  before  they  cast  off 
their  British  colonial  dependence,  and  the  new  ones  each  came 
into  the  Union  directly  from  a  condition  of  dependence,  except 
Texas." 

11  161 


organized  the  American  Fur  Company,  and  two 
years  later  sent  out  expeditions  by  land  and  sea 
to  found  Astoria,  a  post  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Columbia  River  (Map  43b),  which  Capt.  Robert 
Gray  had  discovered  and  named  after  his  ship  in 
1792.  The  land  party,  under  W.  P.  Hunt,  pushed 
their  keel  boats  up  the  Missouri  as  far  as  the 
villages  of  the  Arikara  Indians  (Map  36),  and 
then,  proceeding  south  along  the  Grand  River 
(indicated  on  our  map  as  the  second  tributary 
southeast  of  the  Yellowstone,  now  in  South 
Dakota)  by  horse  and  foot,  past  the  Black 
Hills,  through  the  Crow  country,  and  up  the 
Wind  River,  the  upper  tributary  of  the  Bighorn 
(Maps  36  and  25).  Perforce  abandoning  most  of 
their  equipment,  they  then  pushed  through  the 
ridge  of  the  continent  to  the  Snake,  down  which 
they  floated  in  a  few  days'  respite  from  their  cruel 
toil.  Passing  by  the  region  of  the  modern  Yellow 
stone  Park,  however,  they  encountered  the  Snake 
River  Desert,  a  thousand  miles  of  rocky  waste 
and  sagebrush,  where  game  was  very  scarce  and 
where  they  could  not  make  their  way  down  canon 
sides  to  drink  the  water  of  the  river.  "To  appease 
the  cravings  of  hunger  they  ate  beaver  skins  in 
the  evening  at  the  camp  fire.  They  even  were  at 
last  constrained  to  eat  their  moccasins."  l 

They  struck  out  due  west,  and  at  last,  worn  and 
ragged,  penetrated  the  Blue  Mountai;  s,  near  mod 
ern  W'alla  Walla,  and  reached  the  long-looked-for 
Columbia.  Thus  by  suffering  hardships,  at  which 
we  have  scarcely  hinted,  the  first  commercial  party 
had  pioneered  through  that  forbidding  country. 
The  sea  expedition,  also,  had  had  its  trials  with 
swift  currents  at  the  river's  mouth.  Three  years  of 
hard  work  and  sixty-five  lives  were  used  up  in 
establishing  Astoria,  but  during  the  War  of  1812 
the  place  became  untenable,  and  at  the  beginning 
of  1814  was  turned  over  to  the  North  West  Com 
pany,  which,  together  with  that  of  Hudson's  Bay, 
was  operating  in  the  region. 

But  Astor's  enterprise,  thus  thwarted  in  the  land 
beyond  the  mountains,  was  only  one  of  many  under 
taken  by  Americans.  The  Missouri  Fur  Company 
was  the  first  such  firm  to  enter  the  field,  and  hoped 

1  Gabriel  Franchere,  "Narrative  of  a  Voyage  to  the  Northwest 
Coast,  1811-14,"  in  Early  Western  Travels,  vol.  vi,  pp.  269-270. 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


for  a  monopoly  in  the  great  valley  east  of  the 
mountains.  They  set  up  a  post  among  the  head 
waters  of  the  Missouri,  but,  driven  out  by  the  hos 
tile  Blackfeet,  near  Council  Bluffs,  they  built 
Fort  Lisa,  named  for  their  leader,  and  confined 
their  operations  to  the  region  south  of  the  Mandan 
villages,  which  may  be  indicated  as  theii  sphere 
of  influence.  Astor's  company  built  Fort  Union 
and  others,  and  came  to  control  the  country  of 
the  Assiniboin  and  Blackfoot  Indians,  which  may 
be  shown  as  theirs,  though  this  indication  should 
include  Fort  Laramie  and  its  vicinity,  where 
they  later  gained  control.  It  was  in  1832  that 
the  Yellowstone,  the  company's  steamboat,  first 
stemmed  the  river  current  from  St.  Louis  to  Fort 
Union,  to  the  consternation  of  the  Indians.  In 
1821  Gen.  William  H.  Ashley  and  others  organ 
ized  the  Rocky  Mountain  Fur  Company,  and  a 
party  of  its  traders  two  years  later  discovered 
South  Pass,  the  easiest  gateway  of  the  Rockies. 
Ashley  himself  soon  penetrated  to  Sevier  Lake, 
in  what  is  now  southwestern  Utah.  The  incredibly 
wrretched  Digger  Indians,  who  inhabited  the  des 
ert  region  between  the  Colorado  and  the  Snake, 
could  not  be  counted  on  for  furs,  but  wrhite  trap 
pers  scoured  the  country  regularly  for  Ashley's 
company,  and  it  may  be  indicated  as  his  area  of 
operation. 

Few  American  histories  devote  much  space  to 
Jedediah  Strong  Smith,  a  New  Yorker  associated 
with  General  Ashley,  but  if  we  trace  the  routes 
of  his  explorations  we  will  be  impressed  with 
how  much  country  he  opened  to  geographical 
knowledge  and  to  trade.  First,  in  1824,  he  trav 
eled  from  South  Pass  up  the  Green  and  by  the 
Snake  to  the  site  of  Fort  Boise.  In  the  summer  of 
1826  he  set  out  with  a  small  party,  followed  the 
Sevier  Valley  till  he  reached  the  Virgin,  down 
which  he  traveled  to  the  Colorado,  where  he  found 
Indians  advanced  in  agriculture.  He  continued 
to  the  Mohave  country  and,  turning  due  west, 
he  made  his  way  across  to  San  Diego,  to  the  as 
tonishment  of  the  Mexicans;  he  then  crossed  the 
Coast  Range,  went  through  the  valley  of  Lake 
Tulare,  penetrated  the  Sierra  Nevada,  wading 
through  the  snows  of  the  Sonora  Pass,  and  marched 
across  the  Great  American  Desert  in  twenty  days. 


But  our  map  makes  clear  how,  not  content  with 
this  achievement,  he  scarcely  waited  to  secure  a 
new  equipment  before  starting  out  on  a  journey 
of  thousands  of  miles,1  pushing  up  the  Sacramento 
Valley,  past  Mt.  Shasta,  through  fur  regions  un- 
exploited,  finally  to  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com 
pany's  posts,  and  to  the  Rocky  Mountain  Com 
pany's  rendezvous  at  Pierre's  Hole. 

In  1821  the  North  West  Company  had  been  ab 
sorbed  by  its  older  competitors  of  Hudson's  Bay, 
and  the  valleys  of  the  Columbia  system,  coming 
to  be  known  as  Oregon,  were  really  ruled  by  the 
suave,  discreet,  and  generous  Dr.  John  McLoughlin, 
the  company's  chief  factor  in  the  Far  West.  By 
the  convention  of  1818  joint  occupation  was  pro 
vided  for  the  region  (Map  46),  but  the  white- 
haired  factor  at  Fort  Vancouver  on  the  Columbia 
was  really  autocrat.  In  the  middle  'thirties  Jason 
Lee,  and  other  Protestant  missionaries  whose  wives 
were  the  first  white  women  to  cross  the  continent, 
came  to  Christianize  the  Indians,  settling  in  the 
fertile  Willamette  Valley  (Maps  43b  and  53). 
Their  reports  brought  other  emigrants  and  the 
Oregon  Trail  from  Independence,  Missouri  (Maps 
38,  36,  and  47),  began  to  be  used  for  wagons. 
Hard  times  throughout  the  Middle  West  in  1841 
and  1842  induced  a  considerable  migration,  es 
pecially  from  Illinois;  in  1843  a  provisional  govern 
ment  was  set  up  at  Champoag  (Map  43b),  and 
Oregon  City  became  the  first  metropolis  (Map  47). 
Doctor  McLoughlin  could  not  well  protest,  as 
the  "Honourable  Company's"  servants  were  now 
greatly  outnumbered  by  settlers  from  the  states; 
the  trapper  must  retreat  before  the  farmer. 

With  old  Astoria  in  mind,  the  Democrats,  in 
1844,  declared  for  the  "reoccupation  of  Oregon," 
claiming  a  clear  and  unquestionable  title  as  far  as 
54°  40',  the  boundary  of  the  Russian  trading  region, 
Alaska.  Their  new  President,  Polk,  like  his  pred 
ecessor,  contented  himself  with  offering  the  line  of 
49°,  continued  from  the  Mississippi  Valley,  but  the 
British  reiterated  their  demand  for  the  land  north 
of  the  Columbia  from  the  intersection  with  that 
parallel  to  the  sea.  The  agreement  of  joint  occu 
pation  was  now  annulled  and  wrar  might  soon  have 


1  Our  map  is  incorrect  in  that  Smith  went  from  Los  Angeles 
to  Monterey  by  ship  instead  of  overland  to  San  Jos£. 


162 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN   HISTORY 


resulted,  had  not  Great  Britain  herself,  in  June,  1846, 
made  an  acceptable  offer  of  the  forty -ninth  parallel, 
reserving  Vancouver  Island  and  the  right  to  navi 
gate  the  Columbia,  though  the  northern  line  at 
the  ocean  end  was,  unfortunately,  left  somewhat 
vague.  In  1872  an  arbitration  by  the  Emperor 
of  Germany  divided  the  little  islands  in  the  straits 
of  Juan  de  Fuca,  throwing  the  island  of  San  Juan 
to  the  United  States. 

The  Latter-Day  Saints. — The  'forties  in  America 
are  remembered  as  a  period  of  religious  and  hu 
manitarian  enthusiasms,  some  centering  in  western 
New  York.  In  1827,  near  Palmyra,  in  Wayne 
County  (Map  lla),  a  farm  hand  named  Joseph 
Smith  dug  up,  as  he  said,  certain  gold  plates 
bearing  a  new  revelation.  The  fortunes  of  the 
converts  to  his  theological  beliefs  demand  our  at 
tention,  because  they  founded  a  commonwealth 
and  introduced  a  "problem"  important  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  Far  West.  Their  clannishness  and  claims 
of  special  virtue  were  obnoxious  to  their  neighbors; 
they  moved  to  Kirtland,  Ohio,  about  twenty  miles 
northeast  of  Cleveland,  where,  after  violating  the 
state  banking  law,  they  soon  struck  out  for  In 
dependence,  Missouri.  But  here  they  aroused 
animosity  by  disregard  of  "gentile"  property  titles, 
and  after  the  "Mormon  War,"  lasting  from  1833 
to  1838,  the  apostles  led  the  brethren  back  to 
Nauvoo,  Illinois,  about  fifteen  miles  up  the  Mis 
sissippi  from  Fort  Edwards  (Map  34).  Here  they 
greatly  improved  the  land  and  set  up  stately 
buildings,  but  their  presence  and  attitude  pro 
voked  hostility,  and,  after  their  town  had  been 
cannonaded  in  1846,  they  took  up  their  trek  across 
the  rolling  plains  to  the  western  bank  of  the  Mis 
souri,  opposite  Council  Bluffs,  Iowa  (Map  36), 
which  came  to  be  used  as  the  whiter  quarters  for 
the  "saints"  in  their  progress. 

The  following  year,  under  Brigham  Young,  a 
well-disciplined  force  set  out  to  discover  a  Zion 
beyond  the  reach  of  persecution.  Moving  along 
the  north  bank  of  the  Platte,  somewhat  better  than 
the  Oregon  Trail  on  the  other  side,  they  crossed 
to  Fort  Laramie,  pressed  on  through  South  Pass 
and  across  Green  River  to  Fort  Bridger  (Map  47), 
and  thence,  despite  the  most  disheartening  reports, 
crossed  through  the  other  ranges,  including  the 


Wasatch,  to  the  Salt  Lake  Valley  hi  Mexico,  where 
they  immediately  irrigated  the  soil  and  planted 
grain  for  those  to  come.  The  success  that  follows 
practical  intelligence  and  thrift  came  to  the  Mor 
mons,  and  during  the  next  thirty  years,  by  means 
of  thorough  discipline  and  mutual  aid,  a  hundred 
thousand  people,  the  majority  of  them  women 
and  children,  were  led  over  a  thousand  miles  of 
desert  and  mountain,  with  a  minimum  of  loss  in 
life  and  property.  These  companies  were  collected 
by  missionaries  in  the  British  Isles  and  Scandinavia, 
and  financed  by  an  emigration  fund,  some  coming 
overland  from  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  and 
others  landing  at  New  Orleans.  Map  63  shows  the 
extent  of  their  early  settlement. 

The  Mexican  War. — The  annexation  of  Texas 
aroused  the  undying  resentment  of  Mexico,  and 
she  opposed  with  particular  bitterness  the  extreme 
boundary  claims  of  that  state.  Certain  other  points 
having  been  long  at  issue,  President  Polk  attempted 
to  negotiate,  suggesting  also  the  purchase  of  Cali 
fornia,  but  his  agent  was  not  even  received.  Be 
tween  the  Neuces  and  the  Rio  Grande,  a  territory 
claimed  by  Texas  and  now  by  the  United  States, 
was  the  Mexican  state  of  Tamaulipas,  while  be 
yond  this  and  bounding  old  Texas  on  the  west 
and  northwest  the  disputed  region  was  covered 
by  Coahuila,  Chihuahua,  and  New  Mexico. 

General  Taylor  was  ordered  to  Corpus  Christi 
(Map  45a,  inset),  and  in  March,  1846,  marched 
toward  the  Rio  Grande,  near  the  mouth  of  which 
he  built  Fort  Brown  (now  Brownsville),  its  guns 
commanding  Matamoras  across  the  river.  An 
exploring  party  was  ambushed  and  President  Polk 
declared  that  war  existed  by  reason  of  a  Mexican 
invasion.  Taylor  repaired  to  Point  Isabel  (follow 
lower  inset)  to  protect  his  stores,  and  on  his  re 
turn  routed  his  foes  at  Palo  Alto  and  Resaca  de  la 
Palma  and  crossed  to  occupy  Matamoras.  In 
September  he  marched  forward,  stormed  and  cap 
tured  Monterey,  but  was  soon  obliged  to  part 
with  many  of  his  troops  detailed  to  march  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande  to  join  General  Scott, 
moving  by  sea.  Taylor  went  on  to  Saltillo,  where 
he  was  joined  by  General  Wool,  who  had  marched 
from  San  Antonio.  Thus  reinforced,  he  hastened 
to  meet,  at  Buena  Vista,  the  Mexican  general, 
103 


HARPER'S  ATLAS   OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


Santa  Anna,  whose  forces,  five  times  his  own  in 
number,  he  defeated. 

Meanwhile  Scott  had  proceeded  to  Vera  Cruz 
(Map  45a,  upper  inset)  and,  having  taken  the  town 
on  March  27,  1847,  began  to  cut  his  way  forward 
along  the  national  road  to  the  capital.  Cerro 
Gordo  fell,  April  18th,  before  his  thinning  army, 
Pueblo  on  May  15th,  Cherubusco  on  August  20th, 
and  on  September  14th  he  was  in  the  city  of  Mexico. 

Our  scene  now  shifts  far  to  the  northwest,  the 
Mexican  state  of  California.  In  1769  the  Spanish 
government,  fearing  the  spread  of  Russian  in 
fluence  from  Alaska,  had  begun  to  set  up  posts 
in  this  region,  claimed  for  nearly  a  hundred  and 
thirty  years  before.  The  original  colonists  at  San 
Diego  (Map  44a),  "four  officer?,  sixty-five  soldiers, 
and  seventeen  Franciscans,  with  a  suitable  com 
plement  of  servants,  mule  drivers,  and  converted 
Indians,"  were  typical  of  the  whole  period  of  His 
panic  occupation,  In  strongest  contrast  to  the 
custom  of  the  Anglo-Saxons.  Presidios,  or  forts, 
were  soon  also  established  at  Monterey  (1770), 
at  the  gate  to  the  great  bay  named  for  St.  Francis 
(1776),  and  elsewhere.  Many  missions  were  estab 
lished,  such  as  those  at  San  Carlos  (1775),  a  few 
miles  east  of  Monterey,  and  Dolores  (1776),  a 
short  distance  south  of  the  presidio  on  San  Fran 
cisco  Bay.  That  at  San  Gabriel  (1771),  near  Los 
Angeles,  was  the  largest;  in  1833  there  were  here 
3,000  neophytes  (converted  Indians  whose  labor 
was  controlled),  who  tended  105,000  cattle  and 
raised  40,000  bushels  of  grain.  Those  at  Santa 
Barbara  (1786),  and  at  San  Luis  Rey  (1798),  about 
forty  miles  to  the  northeast,  are  often  esteemed  the 
most  beautiful.  San  Jose  (1777)  was  the  first 
pueblo  or  village  settlement;  twelve  families  were 
collected  and  settled,  in  1781,  at  Neustra  Sefiora 
de  los  Angeles,  now  the  largest  city  of  the  Far  West. 

Life  in  old  California  was  not  "progressive." 
In  1833  the  Mexican  government  ordered  the  church 
land  to  be  sold,  but  the  rancheros,  who  bought  the 
land  that  the  padres  thus  resigned,  made  little 
difference  in  the  quiet  aspect  of  the  country  that 
Richard  Henry  Dana  so  clearly  pictured  in  Two 
Years  Before  the  Mast.  About  1840  Easterners 
began  to  appear,  like  John  A.  Sutter,  who  obtained 


a  grant  a  little  way  up  the  Sacramento  River. 
Yerba  Buena,  founded  in  1836,  three  miles  north 
of  the  mission  at  Dolores,  soon  assumed  the 
name  of  San  Francisco,  began  to  prosper  and  to 
attract  some  from  beyond  the  mountains.  "The 
ownership  of  California,  like  that  of  Oregon,  was 
to  be  determined  not  by  diplomats  and  battle 
ships,  but  by  settlers  in  actual  possession  of  the 
land."  1  A  party  of  Missouri  pioneers,  in  1841, 
came  on  from  the  Salt  Lake  Valley,  across  the 
desert,  and  over  the  lofty  Sonora  Pass  (Map  44a) ; 
and  others  followed  along  the  somewhat  easier 
route  by  Lassen's  Road  and  that  through  the 
Truckee  Pass,  so  that,  in  1846,  there  were  seven 
hundred  Americans  in  California.  We  have  seen 
that  President  Polk  already  sought  to  gain  these 
valleys  for  the  national  domain. 

Col.  John  C.  Fremont's  glowing  narrative,  based 
on  his  explorations  in  1843  and  1844,  encouraged 
this  migration,  and  the  next  year  he  was  sent  to 
seek  out  better  roads  for  emigrants.  Coming  north 
from  Walker  Pass,  he  finally  reached  the  neigh 
borhood  of  Sonoma  (Map  45a)  and,  despite  con 
trary  orders,  aided  a  demonstration  known  as  the 
"Bear  Flag  War."  But  word  soon  reached  the 
rebels  that  hostilities  had  been  begun  between  the 
United  States  and  Mexico  and  that  Commodore 
Sloat  had  occupied  Monterey.  California  was 
easily  won,  and  on  the  arrival  of  General  Kearny's 
force,  detailed  to  march  from  Fort  Leavenworth, 
the  conquest  was  already  accomplished.  California, 
therefore,  as  well  as  the  old  state  of  New  Mexico 
and  the  disputed  parts  of  Texas,  was  transferred 
by  the  treaty  of  Guadaloupe  Hidalgo,  February 
2,  1848,  to  the  United  States  (Map  46). 

Those  who  signed  this  treaty  did  not  know  that 
about  a  week  before,  at  Sutter 's  Mill,  on  the 
American  Fork  not  far  from  Sacramento  (Map 
44a),  a  laborer  had  found  the  grains  that  were  to 
make  that  territory  indeed  the  Golden  West.  The 
"'forty-niners"  were  not  slow  in  coming,  many 
daring  the  long  way  overland,  especially  by  the 
northern  pioneer  route.2 

The  population  so  rapidly  increased  that  im- 

1  Katharine  Coman,   Economic  Beginnings  of  the  Far  West 
(New  York,  1912),  vol.  ii,  p.  227. 

2  Of  course,  many  also  came  by  sea  or  across  Mexico,  Nica 
ragua,  or  the  Isthmus. 


164 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


proved  communication  was  clearly  necessary.  The 
Southern  Pacific  Railroad  was  projected  by  Jeffer 
son  Davis  and  others,  but  the  most  available  route 
would  lie  through  Mexican  territory.  Conse- 


man,  then  our  minister  to  Mexico,  was  directed, 
in  1853,  to  buy  the  necessary  strip  (Map  46), 
paying  $10,000,000,  or  two-thirds  as  much  as  the 
sum  paid  for  the  whole  Southwest  in  the  recent 


quently,  James  Gadsden,  a  South  Carolina  railroad     treaty. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  21 

SLAVERY  AND  THE  TERRITORIES:    FROM  THE  MISSOURI 
COMPROMISE  TO  SECESSION 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  450-518;  Smith,  Parties  and  Slavery;  Chadwick,  Causes  of  the  Civil  War,  pp.  3-69, 

109-342;    Hosmer,  Appeal  to  Arms,  pp.  3-18. 
MAPS:   United  States  (2). 


(Map  42)  he  had  bargained  away  his  opportunity 
in  the  major  part  of  the  old  Louisiana  Purchase 
in  return  for  one  state,  Missouri.  As  in  1848  he 
looked  upon  the  map,  he  saw  for  his  future  south 
of  the  36°  30' l  line  only  a  meager  bit  of  Indian 
country;  and  he  naturally  resolved  that  the  Cali 
fornia  valleys  and  the  territories  of  Utah  and  New 
Mexico,  shortly  to  be  formed,  should  not  be  taken 
from  him.  When  he  read  of  the  Wilmot  proviso 
which  would  thwart  him  completely,  he  thanked 
fate  for  the  Senate,  where  his  statesmen  used  their 
veto.  He  was  willing,  perhaps,  as  a  last  retreat,  to 
accept  President  Folk's  suggestion  that  the  line 
of  36°  30',  permitting  slavery  to  the  South,  should 
be  extended  to  the  Pacific,  for  southern  California 
was  the  most  adaptable  of  the  new  acquisitions  to 
his  system. 

But  as  he  heard  of  the  territorial  organization 
of  Oregon  and  Minnesota  (Map  48),  and  realized 
that  "free"  statehood  would  soon  follow,  he  saw 
that  possibly  this  would  be  too  generous  a  conces 
sion.  He  applauded  Texas  in  her  insistent  claims 
to  hold  within  her  own  jurisdiction  the  vast  area 
which  we  have  indicated  as  contained  within  the 


great  period  of  territorial  expansion  came 
-••  to  a  close  in  1848;  a  magnificent  domain  had 
been  acquired,  available  for  American  homes.  But 
were  they  to  be  homes  of  farmers,  each  driving 
his  own  plow  through  his  various  fields,  or  of 
planters  administering  their  great  estates  where 
gangs  of  negro  slaves  performed  the  simple  but 
laborious  routine  tasks  of  staple  crops,  like  cotton 
or  tobacco?  This  was  a  question  which  would  not 
be  ignored,  for  experience  had  proved  that  each 
system  flourished  only  in  the  absence  of  the  other. 
Many  planters  looked  eagerly  upon  these  virgin 
acres,  for  the  methods  of  their  tillage — more 
properly  called  agricide  than  agriculture — were 
peculiarly  exhausting  to  the  soil,  and  many  saw 
new  fortunes  could  come  only  with  new  fields.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Northern  pioneers,  with  whom 
migration  farther  to  the  west  had  become  an  in 
eradicable  habit,  were  quite  as  resolute  that  the 
land  beyond  the  Mississippi  should  be  held  for 
individual  "improvers,"  like  themselves  and  their 


sons. 


But  the  Southerner,  who  had  no  plan  of  moving, 
was  almost  as  much  interested  in  the  West  as  those 
who  did,  for  his  peculiar  institution,  confronted 
by  a  growing  majority  of  industrial  workers  and 
small  farmers  in  the  nation,  was  politically  on  the 
defensive;  he  needed  more  states,  and  thus  more 
Senators,  to  block  unfavorable  laws.  In  1820 


1  This  line  it  is  seen,  was  along  the  same  latitude  as  the 
southern  boundary  of  Kentucky,  west  of  the  Tennessee  River. 
It  was  thought  best  to  join  to  Missouri  the  entire  group  of 
settlements  which  had  been  formed  southwest  of  the  mouth 
of  the  Ohio,  which  accounts  for  this  protuberance  along  the 
Mississippi. 


165 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


limits  she  had  drawn  in  1836  (Map  Study  No. 
20),  even  though  the  new  President,  General  Tay 
lor,  had  threatened  to  send  soldiers.  When  Texas 
had  been  "reannexed,"  it  had  been  agreed  that 
the  36°  30'  line  should  apply  to  Texas,  and  that 
as  many  as  four  states,  if  Texas  wished,  might  be 
made  from  it.  Hence  it  was  important  that  her 
territory  be  as  wide  as  possible.  He  was  impressed 
with  the  menace  of  the  Free-Soilers'  vote,  as  he 
noted  the  unusual  frequency  of  the  word  "plu 
rality"  in  the  record  of  the  late  election  (Map 
44b2).  He  took  some  interest  in  the  convention 
called  for  June,  1850,  at  Nashville  (Map  42),  to 
threaten  secession  if  the  Polk  plan  were  not  taken, 
though  he  had  more  faith  in  Senator  Clay's  pro 
posals,  which  were  debated  from  January  to  Sep 
tember,  and  whose  territorial  provisions  we  may 
now  indicate  upon  the  map  (Map  48).  He  saw, 
however,  that  the  compromising  sentiment  was 
by  no  means  universal,  for  though  general  in  the 
border  sections,  there  were  many  sections,  north 
and  south,  where  extremists  seemed  bent  on  fol 
lowing  Seward  or  Calhoun  (Map  45b). 

Such  was  the  situation  in  September,  1850,  which 
many  hoped  might  last  forever;  but  an  undeveloped 
country  was  not  likely  to  remain  in  such  legal 
assignments.  Senator  Stephen  A.  Douglas  desired 
to  build  up  the  West.  He  preached  the  policy  of 
land  grants  to  the  railroads,  and  especially  desired 
a  road  to  the  Pacific,  which  would  bring  commerce 
to  Chicago,  such  as  was  projected  in  the  Union 
Pacific  from  Council  Bluffs  (Map  62).  To  make 
this  a  success  it  would  be  desirable  to  open  the 
Indian  country  (Map  48)  to  settlement  as  soon 
as  possible,  for  which  political  provision  should 
be  made.  With  David  Atchison,  of  western  Mis 
souri,  a  proslavery  leader  who  had  gained  control 
of  that  state  and  who  coveted  the  plains  of  Kansas 
for  the  plantation  system,  he  drew  up  a  plan  to 
open  it  to  whatever  kind  of  settlement  might  come, 
thus  pleasing  the  Southern  statesmen  in  his  dis 
regard  of  the  Missouri  Compromise. 

This  Kansas-Nebraska  bill  which  thus  organ 
ized  two  territories  (compare  Maps  48  and  55) 
on  the  principle  of  "squatter  sovereignty" — i.e., 
that  the  actual  settlers  might  decide  as  to  slavery 
when  they  applied  for  statehood — renewed  and  em 


bittered  the  discussion  as  to  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories  and  began  the  series  of  contentions  directly 
leading  to  the  Civil  War.  Our  Map  5  la  reveals 
how  marked  this  sectionalism  had  grown.  In  de 
tails  it  is  instructive,  showing,  for  example,  that 
California  was  sometimes  controlled  by  Senator 
G win's  proslavery  faction,  though  Senator  Brod- 
erick  finally  kept  it  fast  within  the  Union;  that 
New  Hampshire  was  still  loyal  to  the  Democratic 
party,  as  she  had  been  since  the  War  of  1812 
(see  Maps  33bl,  40bl,  40b2,  44bl,  and  44b2), 
though,  disturbed  by  this  slavery  question,  she  was 
to  change  the  following  year,  and  soon  became 
almost  as  steadily  Republican;  that  the  people  of 
Indiana  were  sufficiently  Southern  in  origin  to 
keep  that  state  a  "doubtful"  one  even  to-day; 
and  that  Iowa  had  been  won  by  Douglas's  scheme 
of  railroad  settlement. 

But  the  indignation  throughout  the  North  was 
widespread,  and  nowhere  more  intense  than  in 
the  Northwest.  "Anti-Nebraska  "Democrats  joined 
Whigs  and  Free-Soilers,  for  example,  at  Ripon, 
Wisconsin  (about  seventy-five  miles  northwest  of 
Milwaukee;  Map  48),  to  form  a  new  party  pledged 
to  close  the  territories  to  any  extension  of  slavery. 
On  July  6,  1854,  a  mass  meeting  "under  the  oaks" 
at  Jackson,  Michigan  (Map  48),  representing 
several  states,  drew  up  the  first  platform  of  the 
Republican  party.  Many  others,  north  and  south, 
who  desired  to  emphasize  a  less  sectional  issue, 
joined  the  American  party,  formed  to  combat 
foreign  influence  alleged  especially  to  be  wielded 
through  the  Catholic  Church,  and  this  organiza 
tion  the  next  year  got  virtual  control  of  nine 
states  (Map  52a),  each  of  which  may  be  marked 
with  an  A.  But  the  great  question  of  slavery  and 
the  territories  was  insistent,  and  the  following  year 
all  but  one  of  these  was  lost.  With  the  letters 
J.B.,  J.C.F.,  and  M.F.,  the  initials  of  the  candi 
dates,  indicate  the  states  carried  by  Buchanan, 
Fremont,  and  Fillmore  in  1856  (Map  52b). 

The  competition  for  Kansas  between  the  farmers 
and  the  planters,  each,  to  a  small  degree,  encour 
aged  by  propagandist  funds,  was  such  as  to  lead  to 
bloodshed.  After  reading  the  assignment  indicate 
from  Map  51b,  with  key,  the  principal  "free  state" 
and  "slave  state"  communities  in  that  territory. 

166 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


Another  issue  was  soon  furnished  in  the  case  of 
Dred  Scott,  whose  travels  from  St.  Louis,  through 
Rock  Island,  Illinois  (Map  60),  to  Fort  Snelling 
in  the  Minnesota  Territory  (Map  36),  and  back 
to  Missouri  may  be  indicated  on  the  outline 
map.  The  decision  by  the  Supreme  Court 
that  in  these  sojourns  he  had  not  lost  his  status 
as  a  slave,  seemed  to  make  slavery  possible  any 
where,  despite  the  vote  of  legislatures.  At  Free- 
port  (Map  48)  Lincoln  asked  Douglas  if  this  did 
not  quite  demolish  his  theory  of  popular  sover 
eignty,  but  it  was  replied  that,  whatever  was  a 
negro's  legal  status,  his  freedom  would  actually 
depend  in  any  place  upon  the  local  regulations. 
//  the  student  has  sufficient  time  to  read  a  full  ac 
count  of  these  famous  debates  in  Illinois,  such  as 
that  in  McMaster's  History,  Vol.  VIII,  pages 
318-337,  he  might  indicate  the  whole  itinerary, 
noticing  the  geographical  propriety  of  the  different 
subjects  discussed  to  the  various  localities.  Har 
per's  Ferry,  as  the  scene  of  John  Brown's  raid, 
should  be  shown  (Map  58a). 

Using  Map  54,  indicate  with  candidate's  initials 
who  carried  each  state  in  1860.  Note,  but  do  not 
record,  the  close  vote  in  many  states,  and  especially 
the  strength  of  Bell's  Constitutional  Union  party 
in  the  South. 

Certain  states  seceded  on  hearing  the  result  of 
this  election:  South  Carolina,  December  20,  1860; 
Mississippi,  January  9, 1861;  Florida,  January  10th; 
Alabama,  January  llth;  Georgia,  January  19th; 


Louisiana,  January  26th;  Texas,  February  1st. 
The  conventions  in  these  states,  without  waiting 
for  popular  vote,  except  in  the  case  of  Texas,  sent 
delegates  to  Montgomery,  Alabama  (Map  59a), 
where  the  "Confederate  States  of  America"  were 
formed,  February  8,  1861.  These  states  may  be 
indicated  with  a  large  black  C.  Comparison  with 
Map  Study  No.  19  recalls  that  these  states  were 
mostly  well  within  the  "Cotton  Kingdom,"  which 
seemed  the  most  prosperous  and  confidently  self- 
sufficient  section  of  the  South.  There  remained 
twro  tiers  of  border  slave  states;  one  group,  con 
sisting  of  North  Carolina,  Tennessee,  and  Arkan 
sas,  being  adjacent  to  the  seceding  states,  and 
the  other,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  Ken 
tucky,  and  Missouri,  to  the  free  states.  When 
Lincoln  actually  attempted  to  coerce  the  seced 
ing  members  into  obedience,  the  former  border 
group,  together  with  Virginia,  joined  them  in 
sympathy,  and  should  be  marked  with  a  C  in 
some  other  color.  (Do  you  believe  any  con 
sideration  of  "political  geography"  influenced  the 
selection  of  Bates,  Blair,  and  Smith  as  members 
of  Lincoln's  cabinet?) 

In  his  famous  pronouncement  on  New  Mexico, 
in  the  "Seventh  of  March  speech,"  Daniel  Webster 
had  implied  that  slavery  could  not  go  where  nature 
had  determined  otherwise.  As  you  survey  your 
map,  with  Map  Study  No.  3  in  mind,  does  it  seem 
to  you  that  the  South  could  ever  have  preserved 
the  balance  of  states? 


MAP   STUDY    No.  22 
THE  CIVIL  WAR 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  518-571;    Hosmer,  Appeal  to  Arms;    Outcome  of  the  Civil  War. 
MAPS:  United  States;    Eastern  United  States;    South  Atlantic  States. 


THE  student  has  now  enjoyed,  or,  possibly,  en 
dured,  the  training  of  twenty-one  map  studies, 
and  may  be  expected  himself  to  devise  and  execute 
a  map  to  illustrate,  in  a  comprehensive  way,  the 
military  events  of  the  Civil  War.     The  careful 


reading  of  the  entire  assignment,  or  some  equally 
concise  and  satisfactory  account,  if  any  can  be 
found,  is  essential  before  a  line  is  drawn;  and  it 
would  next  be  well  to  make  a  close  preliminary 
inspection  of  Maps  60  and  56a-59b.  The  study 


167 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


should  be  carefully  planned  to  show  such  essential 
matters  as  the  routes  of  armies  in  the  progress  of 
campaigns,  the  part  played  by  the  navy,  the  rail 
road  routes  which  made  certain  points  of  critical 
importance  (e.g.,  Vicksburg  and  Chattanooga), 
the  obstacles  which  made  so  arduous  the  road  to 
Richmond,  the  "wind  gaps"  in  the  Blue  Ridge, 
making  possible  the  intricate  maneuvers  in  central 
Virginia.  Why  was  Maryland  necessary  to  the 
Federal  government?  How  was  the  Shenandoah 
Valley  used  by  the  Confederates?  Think  con 
stantly  in  terms  of  offensive  and  defensive  strategy 
conditioned  by  rivers  and  mountains,  and  by  rail 


roads,  for  the  first  time  of  military  importance  in 
the  history  of  the  world. 

SUPPLEMENT 

On  a  sheet  of  plain  paper  draw  columns  for  oper 
ations  in  the  West,  operations  in  the  East,  civil 
affairs,  and  foreign  affairs.  Then  draw  transverse 
lines  marking  off  divisions  for  1861,  1862,  1863, 
1864,  and  1865.  After  reading  Bassett,  Chapters 
XXIV-XXVII,  indicate  the  events  of  those  years 
in  their  proper  columns.  Particular  attention 
should  be  paid  to  the  process  of  emancipation. 
(See  also  Map  61.) 


MAP   STUDY   No.  23 
THE  PROCESS  OF  RECONSTRUCTION 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  594-658;   Dunning,  Reconstruction:  Political  and  Economic. 
MAP:  United  States. 


process  of  reconstruction  was  influenced 
<••  by  political  and  social  theories  and  by  party 
rivalries;  not  much  by  physical  geography.  This 
map  study,  therefore,  is  intended  to  fix  in  the  mind, 
by  this  visual  means,  what  was  done  with  the 
conquered  South. 

From  Map  63b  indicate  with  letters  L  and  J, 
where  loyal  governments  were  set  up  under  Lincoln 
and  under  Johnson.  The  dates  printed  on  this 
map,  it  will  be  seen,  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
institution  of  these  governments;  they  were  all 
established  by  the  end  of  1866,  and  are  seen  to 
be  in  states  which  early  fell  under  control  of  the 
Union  armies,  except  Virginia,  where  Pierpont's 
government  at  Alexandria,  later  at  Richmond,  was 
recognized  by  the  Presidents.  Race  riots  at 
Memphis  and  New  Orleans  in  the  spring  and  sum 
mer  of  1866,  as  well  as  the  "black  codes,"  were 
cited  as  evidence  by  radical  Republicans  to  dis 
credit  the  presidential  plan;  and  Johnson  person 
ally  lost  support  by  his  bad  manners.  His  route  in 
"swinging  'round  the  circle"  can  be  indicated,  with 
the  aid  of  Map  62,  from  the  following  quotation 


from  Professor  Dunning's  Reconstruction,  page  81 : 
"Having  accepted  an  invitation  to  be  present  at 
the  laying  of  the  corner  stone  of  a  monument  to 
Stephen  A.  Douglas,  at  Chicago,  on  September  6th, 
Johnson  employed  the  occasion  to  visit  leading 
Northern  cities  and  appeal  directly  to  the  people 
for  the  cause  which  he  represented.  With  a  party 
that  included  Secretaries  Seward  and  Welles,  Post 
master-General  Randall,  General  Grant,  and  Ad 
miral  Farragut,  he  traveled,  by  easy  stages,  through 
New  York  state  and  southern  Ohio  to  Chicago, 
and  after  the  ceremony  there,  visited  St.  Louis 
and  Indianapolis  on  the  way  back  to  Washington. 
From  the  outset  the  President's  speeches  at  the 
various  stopping  places  assumed  a  partisan  char 
acter,  abounding  in  self-praise  and  in  denunciation 
of  Congress;  and  at  Cleveland  and  St.  Louis  in 
terruptions  of  the  crowd,  apparently  calculated, 
drove  him  to  retorts  and  extravagances  of  expres 
sion  which  were  in  the  last  degree  offensive  to 
dignity  and  good  taste."  The  result  in  the  autumn 
congressional  election,  so  disastrous  to  the  Presi 
dent,  may  be  shown  from  Map  63a  by  marking 


168 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


with  the  letters  A.  and  A.A.  the  states  for  and 
against  the  administration  in  the  coming  fortieth 
Congress. 

Encouraged  by  this  result,  Thaddeus  Stevens 
and  his  joint  committee  on  reconstruction,  acting 
on  ill-defined  war  power  supposed  still  to  apper 
tain  to  the  unsettled  conditions  in  the  South, 
passed  the  drastic  Reconstruction  Act  of  March  2, 
1867,  and  the  new  Congress  which  organized  itself 
in  extraordinary  session  immediately  after  the  ex 
piration  of  its  predecessor,  continued  with  the 
supplementary  acts  of  March  23d  and  July  19th, 
all  passed  over  the  President's  veto.1  Reference 
to  Map  63b  will  recall  that  the  government  of 
Tennessee,  having  indorsed  the  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment,  had  been  accepted  the  previous  year  as  a 
state  in  full  membership.  By  the  new  acts  Congress 
divided  the  remaining  "conquered  territory,"  whose 
governments  it  had  refused  to  recognize,  into  five 
military  districts,  which  may  be  indicated  as  fol 
lows:  Virginia;  North  and  South  Carolina;  Georgia, 
Florida,  and  Alabama;  Mississippi  and  Arkansas; 
and  Louisiana  and  Texas.  A  general  was  assigned 
to  the  command  of  each  of  these  new  districts. 

After  reading  the  text  assignment,  locate,  using 
a  key,  a  state  serving  as  a  model  for  the  rest  of  the 
South  in  the  intimidation  of  the  negro;  a  state 
twice  visited  with  military  government  after 
March  2,  1867;  the  birthplace  of  the  Ku-Klux 
Klan  (Map  60);  five  other  places  of  interest  in 
the  reconstruction  period,  explaining  your  selec 
tion  on  the  key  sheet.  From  Map  65b  show  with 
a  heavy  broken  black  outline  the  sections  voting 
for  Hayes  in  1876,  with  a  similar  line  of  another 
color  th^se  voting  for  Tilden.  Show  also  the  con 
tested  states  with  their  twenty-two  electoral  votes. 
In  this  map  there  appears  the  "solid  South,"  that 
has  not  forgotten,  a  political  factor  constant  since 
the  Civil  War,  as  comparison  with  Maps  67,  70, 
77,  and  79  will  suggest. 

A  study  of  the  statistical  data  indicated  here 
will  explain  why  Ohio,  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Indiana,  and  California  have  been  called  "doubt 
ful  states."  These  maps  exaggerate  Ohio's  con 
stancy  to  the  Republicans,  inasmuch  as  she  has 

1  See  J.  D.  Richardson,  Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents, 
vol.  vi,  pp.  498,  531,  536. 


chosen  Democratic  governors  nine  times  since 
the  Civil  War;  perhaps  her  Republican  vote  in 
national  elections  has  been  encouraged  by  the  fact 
that  in  seven  of  the  twelve  campaigns  since  1876 
Lhut  party  has  presented  an  Ohio  man  as  a  candi 
date;  Benjamin  Harrison,  who  grew  to  manhood 
in  Ohio,  was  a  citizen  of  Indiana,  while  Roosevelt 
and  Hughes  were  from  New  York.  Blaine,  the 
"gentleman  from  Maine,"  was  the  only  candidate 
whose  nomination  could  not  be  explained,  in  part, 
by  his  residence  in  a  doubtful  state.  The  Demo 
crats  have  shown  a  similar  discrimination  of  their 
nominees  from  1868  to  1912,  only  Hancock  and 
Bryan  were  not  New  Yorkers,  Wilson  is  from 
New  Jersey,  and  Cox  from  Ohio.  Massachusetts, 
though  Republican  in  elections  where  the  tariff 
is  involved,  has  frequently  elected  Democratic 
governors,  which  may  be  partially  accounted  for 
by  the  presence  of  a  considerable  Irish  population 
(Map  75). 

But  as  one  closely  examines  these  statistics, 
for  example,  in  1884  (Map  67),  he  may  be  sur 
prised  at  the  small  vote  in  the  "solid"  Southern 
states  in  comparison  with  the  number  of  presi 
dential  electors.  This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
colored  population,  by  reason  of  circumstances 
and  Democratic  devices,  are  not  proportionally 
represented  at  the  polls.  When  one  learns  that  in 
all  this  section  more  than  fifteen  per  cent,  of  the 
negroes  are  illiterate,  one  understands  the  argu 
ment  of  danger  offered  by  the  whites  to  explain 
why  the  negro  should  not  be  encouraged  to  ex 
ercise  the  franchise.  In  local  elections  they  .be 
lieve  it  would  be  quite  disastrous  in  many  districts, 
for  the  negroes  are  in  the  majority  in  an  area  ap 
proximately  the  same  as  that  of  the  heaviest  cotton 
production  before  the  Civil  War  (Map  Study  No. 
19),  while  along  the  Mississippi,  and  in  the  band 
of  counties  across  south  central  Alabama,  together 
with  two  counties  in  Florida,  six  in  Georgia,  and 
four  in  South  Carolina,  they  constitute  more  than 
three-fourths  of  the  population.  The  old  cottou 
area  is  also  precisely  that  now  showing  the  greatest 
proportion  of  rented  farms.  The  center  of  colored 
population  has  stood  for  two  generations  past  in 
the  vicinity  of  the  boundary  line  between  Alabama 
and  Georgia,  not  far  from  Tennessee,  though  it 


169 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


is  probable  that  the  1920  census  may  disclose  that 
it  has  recently  moved  somewhat  north,  due  to  the 
labor  migrations  during  the  Great  War.  An  in 
dication  of  all  these  data  on  the  map  will  locate 
the  negro  problem.  The  drama  of  the  Civil  War 
has  closed,  but  this  after-piece  goes  on. 

There  remain  two  other  matters  more  or  less 
remotely  connected  with  the  military  events  of 
the  war,  which  can  be  fixed  in  the  mind  by  means 
of  the  map.  Napoleon  III,  Emperor  of  the  French, 
had  placed  Prince  Maximilian  of  Austria  on  an 
imperial  throne  in  Mexico  in  1864,  thus  taking 
advantage  of  our  preoccupation  to  flout  and  violate 
our  sensibilities  represented  in  the  Monroe  Doc 
trine.  In  1866  General  Sheridan  was  ordered  to 
proceed  with  52,000  men  to  the  Rio  Grande  in  the 
vicinity  of  Brownsville  and  Point  Isabel  (Map 
Study  No.  20),  where  his  threatening  attitude  in 
creased  the  effectiveness  of  Secretary  Seward's 
diplomacy,  and  Napoleon  abandoned  his  enter 


prise,  leaving  Maximilian  to  a  tragic  fate.  Of 
quite  a  different  character  was  another  border 
demonstration.  Great  Britain's  coolness  to  the 
Federal  cause  during  the  early  years  of  the  war 
made  it  even  easier  than  usual  for  Irish  veterans 
of  our  battles  to  draw  together  for  a  stroke  to 
free  their  ancestral  home.  Most  of  the  American 
Fenians,  as  they  were  called,  to  the  embarrass 
ment  of  our  Department  of  State  gave  sup 
port,  in  1866,  to  invasions  into  Canada.  The 
first  raid,  planned  to  start  from  Eastport,  Maine 
(Map  47),  was  prevented  by  prompt  action  of 
American  and  British  officials  and  forces,  but 
thousands  of  armed  men  did  cross  the  boundary 
from  Buffalo,  at  Rouse's  Point,  New  York  (Map 
47),  and  St.  Albans,  Vermont  (Map  34).  The 
Canadian  government  soon  checked  these  forays, 
though  not  till  one  or  two  so-called  battles  had  been 
fought  and  about  two  and  a  half  million  dollars 
had  been  expended  from  the  provincial  treasuries. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  24 
CREATING  WEALTH:    MINES,  RANCHES,   FARMS,   RAILROADS,  MILLS 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  676-691,  731-734;    Sparks,  National  Development,  pp.  53-67,  251-264. 
MAP:  United  States. 


On  the  western  slope  of  the  Sierra  Nevada,  or 
snow-capped  mountains,  certain  Mormon  traders 
had  gathered  to  sell  supplies  to  the  "Argonauts" 
en  route  to  California.  Too  far  away  from  Salt 
Lake  City  to  enjoy  the  benefits  of  the  territorial 
government  of  Utah  (Map  48),  in  the  later  'fifties 
the  citizens  of  Carson  City  (frontispiece)  and  sur 
rounding  settlements  attempted  to  form  a  separate 
territory  to  be  known  as  Washoe,  but  without 
immediate  success.  In  1859  near  by  there  was  un 
covered  the  Comstock  lode,  astonishingly  rich  in 
gold  and  silver.  Virginia  City  and  other  similar 
pine-board  towns  were  rapidly  run  up  by  miners 
in  this  Washoe  region,  a  few  miles  northeast  of 
Lake  Tahoe,  at  the  angle  of  the  California  bound 
ary.  Efforts  toward  statehood  were  now  re 
doubled,  the  territory  of  Nevada  was  set  off,  in 


restoration  of  white  government  in  the 
South  early  in  the  administration  of  President 
Hayes  came  as  a  relief  to  a  country  weary  of  the 
old  moral  issue  of  slavery  and  its  consequences. 
It  was  toward  the  West  that  the  eye  of  the  new 
nation  now  was  turned  to  see  how  it  might  best 
be  developed,  for  the  general  good  and,  especially, 
for  individuals.  The  old  Far  West  of  the  early 
nineteenth  century  (Map  15a),  knowing  only  the 
hoof -beat  of  the  buffalo  and  the  savage  cry  of  the 
beasts  of  wood  and  plain  now  and  then  pursued 
by  red  men,  had  been  penetrated  and  explored, 
as  we  have  seen,  by  1848  (Map  Study  No.  20). 
But  the  trappers  who  roamed  the  wilderness  were 
not  left  undisturbed,  and  the  West  of  Irving's 
Astoria  and  Parkman's  Oregon  Trail  gave  way  to 
that  of  Bret  Harte. 


170 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


1861,  though  its  population  was  only  7,000,  and,  in 
asmuch  as  the  Republican  leaders  in  Congress  felt 
that  two  more  senatorial  votes  might  be  useful  in 
their  conduct  of  reconstruction,  it  was  admitted 
as  a  state  in  1864.  Subsequently  other  mining 
areas  were  developed  along  the  ridge  just  east  of 
the  southwest  border,  at  Eureka  (in  1869;  the  cen 
tral  part  of  the  state),  and  at  Tonapah  (in  1900, 
about  150  miles  southeast  of  Carson  City),  these 
being  somewhat  more  distinguished  for  silver. 
Nevada  remains  the  most  sparsely  settled  state 
in  the  Union  (Map  68). 

The  vast  mineral  resources  of  the  Rocky  Moun 
tains  as  well  began  to  be  revealed  about  the  time 
that  great  armies  were  clashing  in  battle  thousands 
of  miles  to  the  eastward.  In  1858  gold  had  been 
discovered  on  the  plains  not  far  from  modern 
Denver  (frontispiece),  and  a  considerable  emigra 
tion  from  the  East  began,  stimulated  somewhat 
by  the  hard  times  following  the  panic  of  1857. 
Although  within  the  area  of  the  Kansas  territory 
(Map  55),  the  miners,  to  preserve  order,  organized 
an  extra-legal  government  of  their  own,  which 
gave  law  as  the  "Territory  of  Jefferson"  until  1861, 
when,  dropping  one  degree  of  longitude  claimed 
to  the  west  and  two  of  latitude  to  the  north,  it 
was  given  formal  status  under  the  name  of  Col 
orado,  so  called  from  the  ruddy  glow  of  the  sun 
set  on  the  mountains.  The  war  halted,  but  did 
not  wholly  stop,  this  immigration,  and  with  peace 
releasing  many  adventurous  young  men  to  carve 
their  fortunes  from  these  hills  and  gulches,  the 
population  was  considerably  increased.  A  Repub 
lican  Congress  attempted  to  admit  it  as  a  state  in 
1867,  but  failed  before  the  veto  of  President 
Johnson,  and  eight  years  passed  before  the  en 
abling  act  became  law,  Colorado,  the  following 
year,  becoming  the  "Centennial  State."  1 

The  miners  on  their  way  to  Colorado  oftentimes 
encountered  the  immense  herds  of  beef  cattle  being 
driven  on  their  dusty  way  between  their  winter 
ranges  in  Texas  and  those  of  the  warmer  months 
in  the  far-away  territories  of  Dakota  and  Montana. 

1  The  treasures  of  the  earth  have  seemed  quite  inexhaustible; 
the  opening  of  the  Cripple  Creek  vein  (a  short  distance  south 
of  the  center  of  the  state),  in  1893,  brought  many  to  the  state, 
and,  indeed,  a  large  proportion  of  Colorado's  inhabitants  have 
some  connection  with  the  mining  industry. 


The  cowboys  and  their  rivals,  the  shepherds,  paid 
small  attention  to  the  boundaries  of  Indian  reser 
vations  and  had  many  a  fierce  encounter  with  the 
roaming  braves.  But  in  this  they  but  shared  the 
adventures  of  the  miners  who  during  the  Civil 
War  had  rushed  to  the  gold  diggings  in  what  is 
now  southwestern  Idaho  and  western  Montana 
and  on  the  Sweetwater  River  (Wyoming;  Map  36). 
The  War  Department  sent  many  of  its  best  com 
manders  to  subdue  the  savages,  especially  those 
following  Spotted  Tail,  Red  Cloud,  and  Sitting 
Bull,  but  success  came  slowly  and  after  heavy 
losses.  The  force  of  Gen.  George  A.  Custer,  for 
example,  was  annihilated  by  the  Sioux  near  the 
juncture  of  the  Bighorn  and  the  Little  Bighorn 
Rivers,  in  1876.  The  Indian,  the  miner,  the  rancher, 
and  wide  unpeopled  spaces — this  was  the  "Wild 
West"  of  the  generation  following  the  Civil  War, 
reaching  its  full  development  about  1885.  But 
this  isolation  could  not  long  continue. 

The  connection  between  the  eastern  coastal 
plain  and  the  Mississippi  Valley  grew  steadily 
better  after  the  Civil  War,  as  may  be  seen  from 
Map  62.  Show  the  route  toward  Chicago  taken 
by  the  principal  lines  of  the  following  systems: 
Vanderbilt,  Pennsylvania,  Erie,  Grand  Trunk,  and 
the  Mobile  and  Ohio  together  with  the  Illinois 
Central.  Railroads,  which  in  the  East  came  as  a 
convenience,  connecting  old-established  towns,  have 
paved  the  way  for  population  in  western  America. 
Striking  out  across  the  prairies  and  cutting  through 
the  mountains,  they  have  taken  with  them  hun 
dreds  of  thousands  of  farmers  and  business  men 
who  have  created  commonwealths.  For  such 
costly  undertakings  it  was  felt  that  government 
aid  was  indispensable,  and  great  grants  were  made, 
especially  between  1850  and  1871,  in  the  shape  of 
alternate  sections  along  the  routes  surveyed.  "It 
is  estimated  that  under  the  various  railway  acts  no 
less  than  155,524,992  acres  have  been  given  to 
railways.  ...  It  has  been  profitable  for  them  to 
develop  population  and  industries  along  their  lines, 
and  they  have  accordingly  used  their  grants  for 
the  upbuilding  of  the  West."  This  area,  so  granted, 
totals  to  more  than  two  and  one-half  times  that  of 
the  New  England  states.  Using  both  maps,  62 
and  83,  show  the  routes  of  the  Union  Pacific, 


171 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


whose  final  spike  was  driven  near  Ogden,  Utah, 
May  10,  1869,  the  Southern  Pacific  from  New 
Orleans  to  San  Francisco  in  1883;  the  Atchison, 
Topeka,  and  Santa  Fe,  extending  from  the  lower 
Missouri  Valley,  with  St.  Louis  and  Kansas  City 
as  important  terminals,  through  southeastern  Col 
orado,  northern  Arizona,  and  New  Mexico,  to  the 
same  goal  in  the  same  year;  the  Northern  Pacific 
also  in  1883;  and  the  Great  Northern,  which  Mr. 
Hill  completed  from  St.  Paul  to  Puget  Sound  a 
decade  later.  Indicate  the  roads  receiving  land 
grants,  and  twenty  towns  begun  or  developed  be 
cause  of  the  railroads.  Consider  the  thought  of 
the  Indians  as  they  watched  the  engineers  and 
laborers. 

The  facilities  of  transportation  made  new  mining 
areas  important.  The  anthracite  coal  fields  of 
the  Lehigh  Valley,  in  northeastern  Pennsylvania, 
had  produced  a  high-grade  fuel  since  the  'twenties, 
and  the  great  Appalachian  area,  stretching  from 
west-central  Pennsylvania  into  Alabama,  had  been 
more  and  more  largely  developed.  The  railroads 
made  the  fields  of  West  Virginia  and  the  Hocking 
Valley  in  Ohio  particularly  productive  near  the 
close  of  the  centtiry.  At  the  same  time  deposits 
in  southeastern  Colorado  and  on  the  flanks  of 
the  high  ridge  of  the  Rockies  in  the  northern  part 
of  that  state  were  uncovered,  and  became,  some 
years  later,  famous  for  bitter  labor  disputes  or  for 
the  excellence  of  their  product.  Eastern  Illinois, 
the  adjacent  part  of  Indiana,  and,  to  a  smaller 
extent,  central  Missouri,  have  also  become  famous 
for  their  soft  coal. 

The  vicinity  of  Pittsburg,  with  its  myriad 
smoking  chimneys,  attests  the  human  benefit  when 
coal  and  iron  meet.  The  coal  here  has  outlasted 
the  iron,  but,  since  it  has  cost  more  to  transport, 
usually  the  dfe  has  been  carried  to  those  furnaces 
from  other  fields.  The  Lake  Superior  beds  along 
the  northern  peninsula  of  Michigan  produced  about 
as  much  as  Pennsylvania  in  the  later  'seventies,  but 
though  their  production  was  increased  about  eight 
fold  in  the  next  three  decades,  northeastern  Min 
nesota,  with  its  Vermillion  (1884)  and  Messabi 
(1892)  ranges,  the  latter  the  richest  in  the  world, 
surpassed  it  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
century.  The  ore  boats  ply  their  steady  way 


through  the  Lakes  to  the  coal  and  smelting  region. 
The  hills  surrounding  Birmingham,  Alabama  (Map 
82b),  yield  coal,  iron,  and  limestone  in  close  prox 
imity,  and  in  the  last  three  decades  have  made 
that  city  famous  for  its  steel,  while  Pueblo,  Colo 
rado,  with  less  supply,  but  advantageous  marketing 
position,  has  become  the  "Pittsburg  of  the  West." 
The  Adirondack  region,  early  of  importance,  still 
produces  a  considerable  tonnage  of  ore.  The 
development  of  more  and  better  railroads  has 
made  it  possible,  in  late  years,  economically  to 
bring  fuel  to  the  Lake  ports,  where  it  meets  the  ore 
brought  from  the  Lake  Superior  fields,  and  in  con 
sequence  such  places  as  Chicago  and  near-by 
Gary,  Indiana,  as  well  as  Cleveland  and  Buffalo, 
have  become  important  in  the  steel  industry.  Two 
Harbors  and  Marquette  (Map  82b)  are  important 
ore-shipping  points. 

In  Map  Study  No.  4  we  traced  the  route  of 
Jean  Nicolet,  wrho  in  1634  was  sent  by  Champlain 
to  investigate  the  reputed  copper  beds  on  the 
western  shores  of  the  Great  Lakes.  But  seven 
generations  of  savage  red  men  lived  and  died  before 
the  rich  mines  of  the  northern  peninsula  were 
opened  to  the  world  in  1845.  The  Calumet  and 
Hecla  mine  in  the  central  part  was  at  one  time 
probably  the  most  profitable  in  the  world,  but 
about  1890  the  discovery  of  the  copper  mountains 
in  western  Montana  gave  Butte  (Map  83)  and 
neighboring  Anaconda  the  leading  place,  and  by 
1910  the  field  in  southwestern  Arizona  had  sur 
passed  all  others,  its  industry  centering  in  such 
towns  as  Bisbee,  near  the  Mexican  border.  Salt 
Lake  County  in  Utah  now  produces  enough  copper 
to  rank  that  state  above  Michigan. 

The  great  areas  of  agricultural  production  are 
shown  in  Map  82b  and  have  not  changed  in  any 
marked  degree  in  twenty  years.  It  would  be  in 
structive  to  indicate  from  this  same  source,  using 
a  key,  three  areas  producing  each  of  the  following 
commodities :  cement,  lumber,  wool,  and  petroleum. 
Most  of  the  zinc  mined  in  the  United  States  comes 
from  northwestern  Missouri  and  the  adjacent  part 
of  Kansas,  while  most  of  the  country's  lead  is 
found  here  and  in  the  St.  Francis  field,  also  in 
Missouri,  not  far  west  of  Ste.  Gene  vie  ve,  though  the 
Utah  mines  have  become  important  competitors. 


172 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


The  flaxseed  industry  is  located  in  the  eastern  part 
of  the  Dakotas.  Locate  two  cities  in  your  own 
state  important  for  some  specialty.  The  following 
brief  chronology  of  inventions  illustrates  the  rapid 
ity  of  the  technical  changes  in  the  new  industrial 
development : 

1875 — Bell's  telephone  between  Boston  and  Salem. 

1879 — Brush  arc  street-lighting  system  installed  in  San 
Francisco. 

1882 — Edison's  plant  for  incandescent  lighting  opened 
in  New  York  City. 

1885 — Edison's  electric  street  cars  introduced  in  Rich 
mond,  Virginia,  and  Baltimore  (see  Map  24).1 

In  1890  (Map  68)  the  far-western  frontier  line, 
which  bounds  the  unsettled  area,  was  crowded  off 
the  continent,  and  thoughtful  observers  speculated 
as  to  the  results  upon  American  society  of  the  pass 
ing  of  the  American  opportunity  resting  upon  desir 
able  "free  land."  In  Map  Study  No.  17  we  traced 
the  westward  course  of  the  center  of  population  to 
1860;  we  may  now  carry  it  on  from  1860  to  1910: 


Year 
1860 
1870 
1880 
1890 
1900 
1910 


North  Latitude 
39° 

39°  12' 
39°  4' 
39°  12' 
39°  10' 
39°  10' 


West  Longitude 

82°  49' 

83°  36' 

84°  40' 

85°  33' 

85°  49' 

86°  32' 


This  last-named  point,  at  Bloomington,  Indiana,  is 
still  a  great  distance  from  the  center  of  the  area  of 
the  United  States,  a  point  midway  on  the  boundary 
between  Kansas  and  Nebraska.  Indeed,  it  may 
never  reach  it,  for  although  the  development  of 
1  See  C.  A.  Beard,  Contemporary  America  (New  York,  1915). 


the  mines  and  the  fields  has  pulled  the  people 
westward,  and  manufactures  with  them  (in  1900 
the  center  of  manufacturing  had  already  reached 
west-central  Ohio),  yet,  such  has  been  the  growth 
of  cities  on  the  Atlantic  coastal  plain,  that  it  is 
possible  the  final  figures  of  1920  will  show  a  re 
cession  to  the  east.  //  time  permits,  it  would  be 
interesting  to  indicate  the  successive  centers 
of  population  in  your  home  state  during  the 
last  generation.  What  has  brought  about  this 
movement?  1 

We  shall  have  occasion,  in  a  subsequent  map 
study,  to  trace  the  progress  of  immigration  since 
the  Civil  War,  but  it  is  desirable  here  to  indicate 
from  Map  75,  in  a  general  way,  the  distribution  of 
the  northern-European  period,  which  ended  in  the 
'eighties.2  Notice  that  the  South,  for  the  most  part, 
remained  almost  as  much  uninfluenced  by  foreign 
immigration  in  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century  as  it  had  in  the  first. 

Place  in  appropriate  states,  consulting  the  index, 
or  an  encyclopedia,  the  initials  of  the  following 
leaders  mentioned  by  Bassett,  Chapters  XXXIV- 
XXXV,  as  prominent  in  the  'eighties :  Carl  Schurz, 
John  Sherman,  R.  C.  Conkling,  B.  F.  Butler,  T. 
C.  Platt,  J.  G.  Elaine,  T.  Roosevelt,  D.  B.  Hill,  T. 
B.  Reed,  L.  Q.  C.  Lamar,  A.  P.  Gorman,  Matthew 
Quay,  R.  P.  Bland,  T.  V.  Powderly.  On  a  separate 
sheet,  in  sentence  notes,  explain  the  importance 
of  each. 


1  Data  may  be  found  in  plates  119-132  in  the  Statistical  Atlas 
of  the  United  States,  1914,  published  by  the  Department  of  Com 
merce,  Bureau  of  the  Census,  Washington,  D.  C.,  and  available 
at  the  nearest  public  library. 

2  The  Scandinavian  area  given  in  northeastern  Pennsylvania 
should  extend  north  of  the  line  to  include  Jamestown,  New  York. 


MAP    STUDY    No.  25 
THIRD  PARTIES  AND  OTHER  CRITICS  OF  "BIG  BUSINESS" 

TEXT:   Bassett,  pp.  707-715,  721-740. 
MAPS:   United  States  (3). 


IT  was  the  custom  during  the  'eighties  and  early 
'nineties  for  American  periodicals  to  print  statis 
tics  of  comparative  national  production  in  the  main 
staples  of  the  world,  frequently  catching  the  eye 
with  rows  of  pictured  grain  bags,  coal  hods,  steel 
rails,  etc.,  beginning  with  those  of  giant  size  and 
dwindling  down  to  dwarfs.  The  journalists  were 
gratified  to  notice  that  the  products  of  the  United 
States  demanded  more  and  more  space  in  this 
graphic  presentation,  crowding  its  competitors 
into  smaller  and  smaller  compass;  and  "captains 
of  industry"  increasingly  supplied  the  theme  for 
eulogistic  editorials.  That  America  was  growing 
rich  and  powerful  there  could  be  no  doubt,  and 
statesmen  rubbed  their  hands  in  satisfaction. 

But  there  were  many  who  dissented,  many  who 
expressed  their  admiration  for  the  labor  and  in 
telligence  that  brought  these  things  to  pass,  but 
maintained  that  the  benefits  were  ill-distributed, 
that  those  who  worked  the  hardest  got  the  least, 
and  that  the  government  was  managed  by  the 
special  beneficiaries.  The  farmers  who  in  the  latter 
'sixties  had  borrowed  paper  money  to  develop 
their  homestead  sections  or  "railroad  lands,"  found, 
some  years  later,  with  deflation  of  the  currency, 
that  their  debts  must  be  discharged  in  specie,  and 
clamored  for  more  greenbacks,  so  that  money  for 
repayment  might  be  found  as  easily  as  they  had 
once  found  it  to  borrow.  They  bitterly  complained 
of  the  freight  rates  charged  by  the  railroads,  and 
the  taxes  which  they  had  to  pay  in  order  to  retire 
the  bonds  that  states  and  cities  had  once  issued 
as  subventions  to  these  utilities.  On  these  and 
other  issues,  a  farmers'  or  "granger"  movement 
became  politically  successful  by  1873,  in  Illinois, 
soon  followed  by  Iowa,  Wisconsin,  and  Minnesota, 
which  may  be  indicated  with  the  letter  G  as  states 
early  important  in  the  agrarian  protest;  it  suffices 


now  to  say  that  their  organization  spread  through 
out  the  Middle  West,  but  collapsed,  in  part  from 
indiscretions  in  co-operative  manufacturing,  and 
its  members  merged  with  other  adherents  of  the 
Greenback  party. 

Agriculture  in  the  South  was  reorganized  after 
the  Civil  War  with  greatest  difficulty.  Small 
planters,  who  grew  more  numerous,  found  it  nec 
essary  to  pledge  their  crops  to  merchants,  to  pay 
a  ruinous  rate  of  interest,  and  almost  invariably 
sink  deeper  into  debt.  Finding  the  dominant 
Democratic  party  cold  to  their  appeals,  during  the 
middle  'eighties,  another  farmers'  movement  began 
in  Texas  and,  after  some  false  starts,  spread,  by 
amalgamation,  through  Louisiana,  Arkansas,  Ten 
nessee,  Kentucky,  and  Mississippi.  Though  called 
the  Farmers'  and  Laborers'  Union  of  America,  it 
was  more  widely  known  as  the  "Southern  Alli 
ance,"  the  initials  of  which  name  may  indicate  the 
early  development  in  those  states.  The  movement 
spread  through  the  entire  South,  but  its  followers 
remained  in  a  comparatively  small  minority  until 
after  1890.  Meanwhile,  in  the  old  Granger  states, 
hard  times  resulting  from  the  competition  with 
foreign  grain  fie!  is  reinforced  old  grievances,  and 
a  Northwestern  Alliance  was  set  up,  extending 
its  propaganda  with  success  also  into  the  Dakotas, 
Nebraska,  and  Kansas.  But  these  enterprises, 
like  their  predecessors,  drooped,  and  were  aban 
doned  in  discouragement. 

In  place  of  these  social  and  nonpartisan  associa 
tions,  in  1890,  came  political  activity.  The  suffer 
ings  of  the  farmers  brought  about  a  violent  up 
heaval  in  Kansas,  and  were  it  possible  to  represent 
turmoil  and  excitement  on  a  map,  that  state  might 
be  emphatically  designated.  At  Omaha,  Nebraska 
(Map  83),  in  1892,  a  convention  launched  the 
People's  party,  soon  to  be  known  as  the  "Popu- 
174 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


lists,"  and  nominated  General  Weaver  as  a  presi 
dential  candidate.  Besides  the  usual  declarations 
for  government  ownership  and  greenbacks,  the 
convention  demanded  that  silver  be  purchased  by 
the  government  and  coined  in  whatever  amounts 
presented.  This  last  proposal  greatly  pleased  the 
silver-mining  states  (Map  Study  No.  24),  as  well 
as  those  who  wished  "cheap  money,"  and  may 
account,  in  part,  for  the  Populist  vote,  which  may 
be  generally  indicated  from  Map  70.1 

It  will  be  noticed  that  six  new  states  had  been 
admitted  since  the  last  election,  the  two  Dakotas, 
Washington,  and  Montana  (1889)  and  Wyoming 
and  Idaho  (1890).  A  heavy  outline  might  indicate 
these  states.  It  was  generally  thought  that  the 
admission  of  so  many  states  had  resulted  from  a 
bargain  between  the  Republicans  and  Democrats, 
but  both  parties  refused  support  to  the  applica 
tion  of  Utah,  for,  though  her  population  was  three 
and  a  half  times  that  of  Wyoming,  the  social  con 
trol  of  the  Mormon  Church,  despite  the  Edmunds- 
Tucker  Act  of  1887,  was  considered  annoying,  and 
the  plural  marriages,  still  celebrated  in  defiance 
of  the  national  laws  of  1862  and  1882,  were  con 
sidered  scandalous.2  Its  statehood  did  not  come 
until  1896,  and  may  be  so  labeled. 

Looking  to  the  east,  beyond  the  Mississippi,  we 
find  that  the  farmers  were  not  the  only  Americans 
who  felt  themselves  exploited  by  capitalists.  The 
industrial  laborers  had  formed  great  national 
unions,  and  with  this  mutual  support  had  fought 
through  more  or  less  successfully  a  number  of 
important  strikes.  After  reading  Bassett,  pages 
742-743,  show  the  location  of  those  mentioned, 
with  sentence  notes  on  the  back  of  the  map  as  to 
the  significance  of  each. 

On  such  an  issue  as  the  tariff,  of  course,  economic 
geography  goes  far  to  explain  the  position  of  the 
contestants.  The  farmer  is  likely  to  see  in  a  rise 
of  customs  duties,  except  on  agricultural  products, 
only  a  corresponding  rise  in  prices,  while  the  mill 
owner  and  the  laborer  see  the  possibility  of  a  high 
scale  of  profits  and  wages.  Different  sections  have 

1  Observe,  but  do  not  indicate,  the  large  Populist  vote  polled 
in  Oregon,  Wyoming,  Nebraska,  South  Dakota,  Alabama,  and 
Texas. 

2  Mormonism   is  hardly   less  strong  in   Idaho,   and   '-   im 
portant  in  Arizona,  Wyoming,  and  Nevada. 


their  special  preferences;  General  Hancock,  as  the 
Democratic  candidate  for  President  in  1880,  had 
not  been  so  absurd  as  he  was  represented,  when  he 
declared  that  the  tariff  was  "a  local  issue."  On 
a  fresh  outline  sheet  indicate  the  vote  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  on  the  McKinley  bill  of  1890 
(Map  69),  remembering  the  rates  proposed  on 
many  farm  products  as  well  as  manufactured 
goods.  The  irritation  at  the  increased  prices  re 
sulting  from  the  operation  of  this  law  had  a  con 
siderable  effect  upon  the  election  of  1892,  already 
shown  in  this  map  study.  The  bill  proposed  by 
Mr.  W.  L.  Wilson  of  West  Virginia,  reducing  the 
tariff,  passed  the  House,  but  was  amended  up 
ward  by  Senator  Gorman  and  his  colleagues  in 
the  other  House.  In  the  light  of  its  schedules  it  will 
be  instructive  to  observe  the  vote  on  the  Wilson 
measure  as  first  presented,  August  13,  1894  (Map 
71),  though  it  need  not  be  reproduced  upon  the 
outline  map. 

With  all  these  conflicting  interests  in  mind  show 
on  your  tariff  map  with  clearly  printed  initials 
M  and  B,  preferably  using  different  colors,  the 
result  by  states  of  the  electoral  vote  according  to 
the  following  table,  placing  a  small  w  in  those  states 
which  gave  some  electoral  votes  to  the  Populist 
running  mate  of  Bryan,  Thomas  E.  Watson: 


Watson 

3 


175 


McKinley 

and 

Stale 

Hobart 

Bryan 

Sewa 

Alabama  

11 

11 

Arkansas  

8 

5 

California  

8 

1 

1 

Colorado  

4 

4 

Connecticut  .... 

6 

Delaware  

3 

Florida  

4 

4 

Georgia  

13 

13 

Idaho  

3 

3 

Illinois  

24 

Indiana  

15 

Iowa  

13 

Kansas  

10 

10 

Kentucky  

12 

1 

1 

Louisiana  

8 

4 

Maine  

6 

Maryland  

8 

Massachusetts.  . 

15 

Michigan  

14 

Minnesota  

9 

Mississippi  

9 

9 

HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


McKinlry 
and 
tie                     Hobart 

•i  

Bryan 
17 

Sewatt 
13 

Watson 

4 

a  

3 

2 

1 

:a  

8 
3 

4 
3 

4 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebrasl 

Nevada 

New  Hampshire.         4 


New  York  

36 

North  Carolina  . 
North  Dakota.  . 
Ohio  

3 

93 

Oregon  

4 

Pennsylvania.  .  . 
Rhode  Island  .  .  . 
South  Carolina  . 
South  Dakota.  . 
Tennessee  

32 
4 

Texas  

Utah  

3 

Vermont.  . 

4 

11 


9 

4 

12 

15 

3 


12 
15 

2 


State 
Virginia  

McKinley 
and 
Hobart 

Bryan 

12 

Sewatt 

12 

Wat&on 

Washington 
West  Virginia.  .  . 
Wisconsin  

6 
12 

4 

2 

2 

Wyoming  

3 

2 

I 

"271 

176 

149 

~27 

Compare  this  result  with  that  of  the  election 
of  1892.  The  fusion  with  the  Democrats  had 
been,  of  course,  a  bitter  pill  for  Southern  Populists 
to  swallow,  and  many  voted  for  McKinley. 

Place  the  initials  of  the  following  leaders,  men 
tioned  by  Bassett,  Chapters  XXXIV-XXXVI, 
in  the  appropriate  states:  Richard  Olney,  T.  F. 
Bayard,  T.  E.  Watson,  W.  McKinley,  E.  V.  Debs, 
B.  F.  Tillman,  J.  G.  Carlisle,  W.  L.  Wilson,  and 
J.  B.  Weaver. 


MAP   STUDY    No.  26 
WORLD   POWER 

• 

TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  764-827;    Latane,  America  as  a  World  Power. 
MAPS:  World;   Mexico  and  West  Indies. 


United  States,  whose  "manifest  destiny" 
A  had  once  seemed  to  require  only  its  expansion 
straight  westward  to  the  Pacific  coast,  had  no 
sooner  accomplished  that  than  it  turned  attention 
to  other  portions  of  the  continent.  Gouverneur 
Morris  was  asked,  in  1803,  what  he  had  thought 
in  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  the  probable 
extension  of  the  United  States,  and  wrote  in 
reply,  "  I  knew  as  well  as  I  do  now,  that  all  North 
America  must  at  length  be  annexed  to  us." l 
The  failure  of  our  military  scheme  of  conquest  in 
1812  had  dimmed  our  hopes  of  planting  the  Stars 
and  Stripes  on  Hudson  Bay,  but  to  the  southward 
we  met  with  no  such  rebuff.  In  1848  some  had 
desired  all  of  Mexico,  and  in  the  'fifties,  Southern 
ers,  looking  for  plantation  soil,  supported  schemes 
for  annexation  in  Central  America,  to  say  nothing 

1  J.  Sparks,  Life  of  Gouverneur  Morris  (Boston,  1832),  vol.  iii, 
p.  185. 


of  Cuba.  The  arrangement  at  Appomattox  sealed 
the  fate  of  slavery,  but  the  vict3ry  rather  whetted 
the  national  ambition  to  expand.  Hence,  in  1867, 
Secretary  Sewrard  found  support  for  purchasing 
Alaska  from  Russia,  whose  friendliness  during  the 
late  war  was  appreciated  by  the  government. 
Russia,  so  distant  from  these  shores,  was,  on  her 
part,  glad  to  sell,  lest  they  be  seized  at  any  moment 
by  her  inveterate  enemy,  the  British  Empire,  whose 
boundary  here  marched  with  hers.  Though  the 
new  territory,  which  may  be  indicated  from  the 
frontispiece  (noting  its  size  compared  with  the 
United  States  of  1866),  was  derisively  described 
as  "Seward's  Ice  Box"  and  "Walrussia,"  it  was 
declared  quite  habitable,  Sitka  having  a  lower 
average  temperature  than  Ottawa.  Its  settlement, 
despite  these  reassuring  accounts,  was  long  delayed. 
Soon  after  the  Civil  War  there  were  attempts  to 
gain  a  foothold  in  the  Caribbean,  in  the  Danish 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


West  Indies  (now  the  Virgin  Islands;  frontispiece), 
and  in  Santa  Domingo  (Map  73),  but  they  did 
not  meet  the  approval  of  the  nation. 

Considerations  of  trade,  a  self-sufficient  attitude 
toward  European  monarchies,  and  a  genuine  desire 
to  be  of  service  were  all  to  be  found  in  the  policy 
of  Secretary  Elaine,  first  expressed  in  1881,  to 
draw  all  the  American  nations  into  closer  relations. 
The  knowledge  of  our  citizens  of  the  lands  to  the 
south  was  so  insufficient  as  to  lead  many  to  con 
sult  a  map  in  following  the  Secretary's  notes.  Lest 
this  general  ignorance  be  not  yet  entirely  dispelled, 
the  student  is  now  asked  to  consult  some  modern 
map  and,  using  a  key  when  indispensable,  to  indi 
cate  on  the  world  map  the  name  of  every  country 
south  of  the  Rio  Grande.  Notice  the  changes 
since  1823  (Map  35a),  when  the  Monroe  Doctrine 
was  announced:  Venezuela  had  been  marked  off 
from  Colombia  in  1829,  and  Ecuador  in  1830; 
Bolivia,  in  1825,  had  achieved  independence;  the 
Patagonian  desert  had  been  conquered  by  1880, 
and  the  land  divided  between  Chile  and  the  Argen 
tine  Republic,  though  the  boundary  was  not 
definitely  settled  until  1902.  The  three  parts  of 
Guiana  still  remain  as  European  colonies.  Locate 
the  boundary  between  victorious  Chile  and  de 
feated  Peru,  which  Secretary  Elaine  attempted  to 
adjust  through  mediation  in  1881,  and  Valparaiso, 
where  sailors  from  the  U.  S.  S.  Baltimore  were  at 
tacked  by  Balmecedists,  October  16,  1892. 

Secretary  Elaine,  eight  years  later,  did  have  the 
pleasure  of  presiding  over  a  Pan-American  Con 
gress  at  Washington,  which  led  to  several  treaties 
of  reciprocity  in  customs  duties.  The  South 
American  republics  had  come,  for  a  time,  to  look 
to  the  United  States  as  their  champion  in  world 
affairs,  and  Venezuela  had  for  some  years  appealed 
to  the  "Colossus  of  the  North"  to  arbitrate  a 
boundary  dispute  between  herself  and  Great  Brit 
ain  (Map  35a).  President  Cleveland  invoked  the 
Monroe  Doctrine,  strengthened  by  tradition  since 
1823,  and  insisted  upon  this  arbitration  even  to 
a  threat  of  war.  An  international  arrangement, 
in  1897,  resulted  in  moving  the  boundary  slightly 
to  the  northwest,  as  may  be  indicated  on  our  map. 
Locate  Puerto  Cabello  (a  few  miles  west  of  Caracas) , 
which  President  Roosevelt  allowed  Germany,  Great 
12  177 


Britain,  and  Italy  to  bombard,  in  1903,  without 
remonstrance,  since  they  proposed  only  to  collect 
debts  and  not  take  territory. 

Our  federal  system,  by  which  police  and  property 
laws  are  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  state  and 
foreign  relations  are  in  charge  of  the  national 
government,  might  conceivably  make  inevitable 
a  war  undesired  by  the  majority  of  Amer 
icans.  After  reading  Bassett,  Chapter  XXXVI, 
locate  the  seat  of  the  Mafia  disturbances  of  1891 
and  the  area  of  anti-Mongolian  feeling  in  the 
United  States.  Our  world  trade  has  made  a  large 
navy  seem  indispensable;  but  a  navy  effective 
for  distant  service  is  not  possible  without  coaling 
stations.  On  this  consideration,  in  1878,  our  gov 
ernment  obtained  from  native  chiefs  the  right  to 
use  Pago  Pago  (pronounced  Pango  Pango)  on 
Tutuila  Island  in  the  Samoan  group  (Map  80b, 
noticing  inset)  as  a  coaling  station.  Germany 
and  England  obtained  similar  rights  in  near-by 
ports.  After  civil  wars  among  the  natives,  in  which 
the  Europeans  were  likely  to  become  involved,  a 
treaty  was  drawn  up  at  Berlin  between  those 
powers  and  Samoa,  providing  for  a  joint  protec-. 
torate  which  would  nevertheless  guarantee  the 
autonomy  of  the  native  government.  Continued 
friction  between  the  Germans  on  one  side  and  the 
Americans  and  British  on  the  other  made  a  par 
tition  seem  necessary,  and  by  a  convention  at 
Washington,  in  1899,  the  United  States  withdrew 
from  all  islands  west  of  Tutuila.  In  1900,  Great 
Britain,  in  consideration  of  compensations  else 
where,  withdrew,  leaving  Germany  with  Savaii, 
Upola,  and  six  smaller  islands,  while  the  United 
States  has  Tutuila  and  also  five  others,  including 
the  Manua  group.  The  German  possessions,  it 
will  be  observed,  are  larger,  and  they  are  more 
populous;  but  the  harbor  of  Pago  Pago  is  the  best 
in  the  group.  These  negotiations  drew  the  atten 
tion  of  Americans  to  the  Pacific  and  reminded  them 
that,  in  1867,  Brooks,  or  Midway,  Islands  (Map 
80b),  lying  1,100  miles  west  of  Honolulu,  were 
occupied  by  the  commander  of  the  U.  S.  S.  LacJca- 
wanna,  and  similarly  Wake  Island,  thirty-two 
years  later,  was  taken  possession  of  by  the  com 
mander  of  the  U.  S.  S.  Bennington.  The  interest 
ing  political  incidents  of  the  Hawaiian  controversy 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


are  familiar  to  the  student  from  his  reading,  and 
he  may  now  indicate  these  islands,  with  date  of 
annexation.  Honolulu,  on  the  island  of  Oaku, 
is  seen  to  be  2,100  miles  from  San  Francisco, 
and  about  5,000  miles  from  Manila.  In  1900 
the  population  of  the  group  was  154,000,  hav 
ing  increased  71  per  cent,  during  the  previous 
decade. 

To  illustrate  the  Spanish-American  War,  locate 
the  place  of  the  destruction  of  the  Maine;  the 
greatest  naval  victory  of  the  war;  Luzon,  Min 
danao,  and  Manila.  Trace  the  route  of  Cervera, 
indicating  the  place  of  his  destination,  and  the 
voyage  of  the  Oregon.  Show  all  the  land  acquired 
through  the  treaty  with  Spain,  February  6,  1899 
(Maps  73,  74,  and  80b). 

The  United  States  co-operated  in  the  interna 
tional  expedition  to  put  down  the  Boxer  Rebellion 
in  China  in  1900,  but  this  expeditionary  force  was 
only  one  of  many  in  the  history  of  America.  With 
the  help  of  Map  82a  and  an  encyclopedia,  locate 
three  places  outside  of  North  America  visited  by 
American  forces,  omitting  those  mentioned  in  this 
study,  stating  on  the  other  side  of  the  map  sheet 
the  occasion  of  each. 

Alaska,  at  first  an  object  of  jest  and  ridicule, 
was  soon  recognized  as  valuable.  The  boundary 
line,  in  1867,  had  been  run  west  of  St.  Lawrence 
Island  (the  largest  island  shown  in  the  frontis 
piece  inset)  and  southwest  to  beyond  the  western 
point  of  the  Aleutian  Islands.  About  the  center 
of  the  marine  area  lying  between  this  line  and  the 
mainland  were  the  Pribiloff  Islands,  the  greatest 
nursery  of  fur  seals  in  the  world.  The  govern 
ment,  as  early  as  1866,  prohibited  the  killing  of 
seals  on  these  islands,  or  in  "adjacent  waters," 
without  special  license.  In  1886  British  ships  en 
gaged  in  pelagic  sealing — i.e.,  hunting  with  guns  on 
the  sea — were  captured  by  an  American  revenue 
cutter,  though  they  were  sixty  miles  from  land. 
There  was  much  international  discussion  as  to 
whether  the  United  States  had  the  right  to  enforce 
its  law  beyond  the  three-mile  limit,  and  the  case 
was  finally,  in  1893,  submitted  to  an  arbitration 
court.  An  ingenious  argument  was  advanced  that 
seals  had  some  of  the  characteristics  of  domestic 
animals  and  could  be  considered  American  property, 


even  out  at  sea,  but  the  verdict  of  the  court  was 
wholly  in  favor  of  the  British. 

It  was  soon  known  that  Alaska  contained  some 
gold;  indeed,  prospectors  had  been  rewarded  as 
early  as  1861.  Juneau,  which  may  be  indicated, 
with  its  gold  field,  from  the  frontispiece,  was 
founded  in  1880.  But  it  was  not  until  1896,  when 
the  Klondike  mines  were  opened  in  the  Yukon 
Valley  (frontispiece)  that  a  rush  came,  reminiscent 
of  the  days  of  the  'forty-niners.  Four  years  later, 
Nome,  on  the  Seward  Peninsula,  was  the  scene  of 
a  similar  boom.  The  great  wealth  of  the  Klondike 
region  made  the  question  of  the  Canadian  boundary, 
unsettled  since  the  days  of  Russian  occupation, 
one  of  keen  controversy  and  considerable  im 
portance.  From  our  Map  65a  show  as  accurately  as 
possible  on  the  world  map  the  claims  of  the  litigants 
and  the  final  line  awarded  by  the  joint  board  of 
adjudication  at  London  in  1903.  The  main  ques 
tion  was  whether  the  language  of  the  Russo- 
American  treaties  of  1825  and  1867  had  meant 
that  the  line  should  run  across  the  fiords  or  around 
them.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  decision  favored 
the  United  States.  Now  that  Juneau,  the  largest 
town  in  Alaska,  was  safely  within  the  American 
border,  it  was  made  the  seat  of  government  for 
the  region  in  1906. 

The  interest  in  a  seaway  from  the  Caribbean  to 
the  Pacific,  which  dated  back  to  the  days  of  Colum 
bus,  became  more  acute  after  the  acquisition  of 
California  and  the  discovery  of  gold.  Several 
routes  were  projected,  which  may  be  shown  from 
Map  72,  and  the  Clayton-Bulwer  Treaty  of  1850 
was  intended  to  apply  to  any  of  them.  But  the 
surveys  made  between  1870  and  1875  showed  that 
only  those  traversing  Nicaragua  and  Panama,  a 
part  of  Colombia,  were  of  practical  consideration, 
the  preference  being  given  at  first  to  the  former, 
though  it  would  require  locks  to  lower  boats  from 
the  lake  to  the  western  ocean.  An  international 
conference,  in  1879,  decided  that  a  sea-level  canal 
be  built  from  Colon  to  Panama  (which  locate), 
and  construction  was  begun  by  a  European  com 
pany  in  1888,  though  its  slowness  was  discouraging. 
Americans  as  late  as  1900  planned  a  canal  by  the 
Nicaragua  route,  some  work  was  begun,  and  finally 
Congress  authorized  its  support  in  1902,  if  no 


178 


HARPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


arrangement  could  be  reached  with  Colombia  as 
to  the  Panama  route.  From  your  reading  you 
have  learned  of  the  diplomatic  arrangements  finally 
leading  to  the  establishment  of  the  Canal  Zone 
and  the  building  of  the  canal,  officially  opened  in 
1915. 

After  reading  the  assignment,  locate,  from  Map 
81,  the  possessions,  leased  areas,  and  protectorates 
of  the  United  States  in  the  Caribbean  region,  giv 


ing  the  date  of  acquisition  of  each.  As  a  suggestion 
of  the  part  played  by  the  United  States  in  world 
politics  during  this  era,  locate  The  Hague;  Ports 
mouth,  New  Hampshire,  where  the  Russo-  Japanese 
treaty  was  signed;  and  Algeciras  (near  Gibraltar), 
where  America  took  part  in  the  international 
conference  held  to  consider  Germany's  complaints 
of  France.  Locate  Tampico  (Map  73)  and  Vera 
Cruz,  important  in  our  relations  with  Mexico. 


MAP   STUDY   No.  27 
REFORMS  AND  ENTERPRISE  OF  THE  TWENTIETH  CENTUPY 


TEXT:  Bassett,  pp.  829-852;   Ogg,  National  Progress. 
MAPS:   United  States  (2). 


ONE  has  but  to  turn  to  the  first  message  of 
President  Roosevelt  to  Congress  to  feel  that 
public  life  in  the  new  century  was  to  mean  some 
thing  more  constructive  and  adventuresome  than 
it  had  meant  in  the  old.  Experiments  in  govern 
ment,  particularly  in  the  Western  states,  were 
being  tried,  that  would  have  astonished  the  states 
men  of  the  'eighties.  Scientific  men  were  bringing 
scientific  methods  in  the  solution  of  agricultural, 
business  and  social  problems  to  the  service  of  the 
government,  in  an  era  that  looked  hopefully  toward 
progress  and  reform.  It  was  urged,  with  earnest 
ness,  that  the  remedy  for  the  evils  of  democracy 
was  more  democracy — that  direct  participation  of 
the  people  in  state  government  was  the  way  to 
banish  bossism — and  in  1912  eleven  states  had 
already  adopted  statewide  initiative  and  referen 
dum,  and  may  be  indicated  with  the  letters  I.  &  R., 
as  follows:  Oregon,  California,  Idaho,  Montana, 
Utah,  Colorado,  South  Dakota,  Oklahoma,  Mis 
souri,  Arkansas,  and  Maine.1  The  pioneer  life 
making  for  equality  before  the  face  of  nature  was 
no  doubt  a  democratic  influence,  and  this  insistence 
on  a  direct  part  in  the  government  was  not  the 
only  sentiment  spreading  from  the  West.  As  in 
Scandinavia,  Finland,  and  the  Antipodes,  the 

1  Nevada  and  New  Mexico  had  the  referendum  only;  the 
measures  were  pending  in  six  other  states. 


women  of  the  West  bore  an  obviously  equal  part 
in  the  struggle  for  existence  and  were  granted 
equality  in  political  life.  The  letter  W.,  with  date, 
may  indicate  the  states  which  had  granted  women 
full  suffrage  by  the  end  of  1912:  Wyoming 
(1869),  Colorado  (1893),  Utah  and  Idaho  (1896), 
Washington  (1910),  California,  Arizona,  Kansas, 
and  Oregon  (1912).  It  will  be  noticed  that  the 
admission  of  Oklahoma  (1907),  and  Arizona  and 
New  Mexico  (1911),  which  may  be  shown  with 
heavy  boundary  lines,  had  strengthened  the  in 
fluence  of  the  West. 

It  was  claimed  that  woman  suffrage  would 
hasten  the  prohibition  of  the  liquor  traffic,  and  so 
the  event  proved.  But  the  statistics  of  state 
wide  prohibition,  as  it  was  in  1912,  show  more 
connection  with  the  negro  problem:  Maine,  Kan 
sas,  West  Virginia,  Tennessee,  North  Carolina, 
Mississippi,  and  Georgia  were  already  legally 
"dry."  This  connection  became  more  apparent 
as  the  years  went  on,  though  these  states  marked 
with  the  letter  P.  will  serve  to  show  the  sections 
of  early  development  of  this  movement.  The 
South  was  not  cordial  to  the  woman-suffrage 
propaganda,  as  it  felt  that  the  negro  question 
would  be  still  more  complicated,  and  the  manu 
facturers  feared  the  influence  of  the  women's  vote 
upon  the  labor  laws.  A  heavy  line  along  the  north- 


179 


ern  boundary  of  Virginia,  Kentucky,  Arkansas, 
and  Texas  marks  off  the  territory,  as  it  stood  in 
1912,  where  more  than  half  the  boys  of  fourteen 
and  fifteen  years  of  age  were  engaged  in  gainful 
occupations,  and  South  Carolina  and  Mississippi 
showed  a  like  proportion  of  working  girls.  This 
was  and  is  the  region  of  child  labor. 

With  the  exception  of  the  liquor  question,  these 
issues,  though  at  that  time  supposed  by  many 
legally  to  belong  to  state  politics,  found  a  place 
in  the  platform  of  the  Progressive  party,  whose 
leader,  Colonel  Roosevelt,  played  a  dramatic  part 
in  the  campaign  of  1912.  Using  Map  77,  show 
with  shading  what  party  carried  each  state  in 
that  election.  In  many  states  the  combined  mi 
norities  outnumbered  the  successful  Democrats. 

All  three  party  platforms  in  1912  agreed  upon 
the  need  of  conservation  of  natural  resources, 
though  this  was  more  a  concern  of  the  Eastern 
consumer  fearing  high  prices  in  the  future,  than  of 
the  Western  exploiter  intent  on  immediate  gain. 
The  public  lands  most  available  for  farming  and 
mining  had  largely  been  granted  by  the  end  of  the 
nineteenth  century;  yet  more  than  300,000  acres 
(outside  Alaska)  remained,  a  considerable  part  of 
it  eligible  for  lumbering  and,  if  artificially  watered, 
for  agriculture.  The  following  states  had,  at  the 
time  of  that  election,  more  than  15,000,000 
acres  each,  and  should  be  marked  with  Roman 
numerals,  according  to  rank  in  acreage:  Arizona 
(39,625,195  A),  California  (20,853,637),  Colorado 
(19,353,231),  Idaho  (17,915,672),  Montana  (21,- 
542,853),  Nevada  (55,138,593),  New  Mexico 
(31,298,621),  Oregon  (16,545,522),  Wyoming 
(32,255,679).  In  his  .first  message,  more  than  a 
decade  before,  President  Roosevelt  had  urged 
the  withholding  of  forest  and  mineral  lands  from 
grant  for  a  time,  and  the  expenditure  of  national 
funds  to  forward  irrigation.  The  latter  proposal 
naturally  appealed  to  Senator  Newlands  of  Nevada, 
and  the  Newlands  Act  of  1902  appropriated 
$20,000,000  for  that  purpose,  the  United  States 
now  engaging  directly  in  construction  rather  than 
confining  itself  to  co-operation  with  the  states. 
With  the  help  of  Map  80a  the  student  may  now 
indicate  the  chief  areas  of  irrigation  provided  by 
the  Reclamation  Service.  The  most  famous  enter 


prises  are  those  of  the  Roosevelt  Dam  (280  feet 
high),  and  Salt  River  in  south-central  Arizona; 
the  Shoshone  Dam  in  northern  Wyoming;  the  Rio 
Grande  development  in  New  Mexico;  the  Truckee 
project  in  the  district  of  Lake  Tahoe  lying  across 
the  California-Nevada  border;  and  the  Sun  River 
project  in  the  northwestern  part  of  Montana. 

Whereas  most  of  the  leaders  whose  residences 
we  have  indicated  in  former  map  studies  have 
lived  in  the  East,  with  the  spread  of  population 
it  was  expected  that  the  West  would  furnish  its 
share.  The  success  of  the  Democrats  in  1912  and 
1916,1  of  course,  brought  opportunity  for  national 
leadership  to  the  South.  Show  by  initials  the 
home  states  of  the  following:  R.  M.  LaFollette, 
Elihu  Root,  Jonathan  Bourne,  Boies  Penrose,  E. 
M.  House,  N.  W.  Aldrich,  W.  R.  Borah,  A.  S. 
Burleson,  Hiram  Johnson,  J.  A.  Reed,  J.  B.  Foraker, 
F.  W.  Lane,  Woodrow  Wilson,  V.  L.  Berger, 
Claude  Kitchin,  Champ  Clark,  H.  C.  Lodge. 

SUPPLEMENT 

On  separate  sheets  of  plain  paper  prepare  graphic 
charts  showing  the  course  of  population  growth, 
urban  residence,  immigration. 

Population. — Lay  out  a  rectangle  7^  in.  by  5  in. 
Divide  the  short  way  into  parallel  sections  %  in. 
long,  representing  the  decades  from  1800  to  1910, 
and  divide  the  long  way  into  29  sections,  each 
%  in-  broad  and  representing  each  10  millions. 
Then  plot  a  curve  to  show  the  growth  in  the  United 
States  according  to  the  following  statistics  given 
in  round  numbers:  1800 — 5  m.,  1810 — 7  m., 
1820—9^  m.,  1830—13  m.,  1840—17  m.,  1850 
—23  m.,  1860—31  m.,  1870—38^  m.,  1880— 
50  m.,  1890—63  m.,  1900—75  m.,  1910—92  m. 
Draw  also  graphs  showing  the  population  of  Rus 
sia,  in  millions,  throughout  the  century:  38,  42, 
47,  53,  57,  62,  72,  78,  88,  98,  113,  138.  Of  Spain: 
11,  11,  12,  13,  13,  14,  16,  17,  17,  18,  19,  20.  Of 
France:  27,  30,  31,  33,  34,  36,  38,  38,  38^,  39. 
Of  United  Kingdom:  16,  18,  21,  24,  27,  28,  29, 
32,  35,  38,  42,  45. 

Immigration. — Draw  a  5-inch  square  and  divide 


180 


1  Map  79  should  be  examined  along  with  Map  77,  but  need 
not  be  reproduced. 


HAMPER'S  ATLAS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


it  into  3^-inch  squares.  Number  decades  along 
the  top,  beginning  with  1820,  and  number  millions 
along  the  left-hand  side.  Then  plot  the  curve  for 
the  following  statistics  of  total  immigration  by 
decades:  143,439;  599,125;  1,713,251;  2,598,214; 


2,318,824;  2,812,191;  5,246,616;  3,844,420;  8,203,- 
388;  6,347,380.  The  student  is,  of  course,  aware 
that  it  is  not  only  the  size  of  the  immigration, 
but,  since  1882,  its  new  character,  that  constitutes 
the  "problem." 


THE    END 


RETURN  TO:      CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
198  Main  Stacks 


LOAN  PERIOD     1 
Home  Use 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS. 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 
Books  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405. 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW. 

DEC  1  1  2DD' 

FORM  NO.  DD6                        UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
50M    6-00                                                 Berkeley,  California  94720-6000 

U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


